Loading...
2014-PLANNING BOARD CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 00 2114 DEC i I A 8& 28 NOTICE OF MEETING FILE 8 C1'1TY CLERK. SALEM.MASS- You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,December 18,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • December 4,2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 403,405 &406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for Site Plan Review,a Planned • Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit, for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lots 91,95 & 97) Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit,as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping, and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: Osborne Hills/Strongwater Crossing Applicant: Osborne Hills Realty Trust Description: A request for Surety Bond Release for Phase IIB. IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Letter submitted to the Planning Board regarding a Final Decision of the Energy Facilities • Siting Board This notice posted on "Offic�>;I�;11'ti��oard" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on EE at cAzP1W-/ in accordance with MGL Chap.3OA, Sections 18-25. City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for December 18,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour r ightr under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A f 18-25 and City Ordinance S 2-2028 througb 5 2-2033. • • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 W W W.SALEM.COM 1 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 • Page 1 of 8 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,December 18,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,December 18, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor,at 120 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:07 pm. Roll Call Those present were:Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson,Vice Chair, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, Bill Griset, Matthew Veno and Noah Koretz.Absent: Dale Yale and Kirt Rieder. Also present: Erin Schaeffer,Staff Planner, Lynn Duncan,City Planner and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Approval of Minutes December 4,2014 Regular Meeting Minutes A minor correction was made by the Planning Board members. • Motion and Vote:Helen Sides made a motion to approve the revised December4 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor and none(0) opposed. Regular Agenda Location: Osborne Hills/Strongwater Crossing Applicant: Osborne Hills Realty Trust Description: A request for Surety Bond Release for Phase IIB. Documents and Exhibitions: Correspondence from Mr. DiBiase dated December,22,2014. Correspondence from Jim Rivard,Senior Engineer December 7,2014-Fay,Spofford&Thorndike, Inc.; 5 Burlington Woods, Burlington MA(clerk of works on project) Paul DiBiasi,Trustee of Osborne Realty Trust,spoke on behalf of the applicant.They have substantially completed phase 2 of the project;the final pavement of roadway and sidewalks remains to be completed.They request approval for a partial release of surety funds. • L City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–December 18, 2014 Page 2 of 8 • Board Discussion Board asked if paving will be done in spring, Mr.DiBiasi advised the sidewalks will be done in the spring. The roadway has held up quite well, but additional truck traffic is expected.They are willing to pave now if requested by the City engineer. Mr. DiBiasi confirmed the request is to reduce the surety bond by$100,230.The remaining balance will be$44,123.This is a tri-party agreement that includes the bank.The remainder is enough to cover the final paving/sidewalks. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the partial release of$100,230.00 in surety bond funds,seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms.Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area, LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review, a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit and a Stormwater Management Permit for the construction of an approximately • 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Documents and Exhibitions: • City of Salem Memorandum dated November 20, 2014, RE: Legal Opinion—RCG Dodge-Area Planned Unit Development • Draft Decision and Special Conditions Matthew Picarsic, Managing Principal for RCG, LLC(developer) presented for the applicant. Other proponent presenters/speakers included: • Jonathan Ofilos;Tinti, Quinn,Grover& Frey, PC,27 Congress Street • Seth Zeren, Development Manager, RCG, LLC. Mr. Picarsic reviewed the current status of the application.The developer has added a schematic plan for the alternate program use with more residential space and no hotel.The engineers in the presence of city engineers have completed the additional investigation work to determine the manhole has been accurately rendered on the submitted plans. Chair Puleo read into the record the letter from the City Solicitor regarding the applicant's request for approval of two program use plans, one being an alternate plan. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 • Page 3 of 8 Board Discussion: Board agreed they have an adequate understanding of the details of the two different plans being presented. Lynn Duncan advised there is a single Development Plan with two different program uses: Program Use A(base program): 111 hotel,84 residential,20K sf space Program Use B:0 hotel, 145 residential units and approximately 28K sf commercial space. Both programs are based on the same development size of approximately 190,000 sf, 2xx parking spaces. The Board explored at length four key areas of concern: 1. Does the Board have the ability to approve two separate program use plans for one parcel,what are the precedents and current legal opinion. 2. Appropriate notice in the event of a change from Program Use A to Program Use B 3. As two sets of building plans will be required Program Use Plan A and Program Use Plan should the PlanningBoard issue two separate decisions for this project. 4. Frame the decision in such a manner as to require the developer to appear before the City again in the event of a significant change in program use, such as conversion of the hotel to residential use. Board asked for clarification,are two votes required for each separate program use?Ms. Duncan advised no,the development plan is the same for both;in addition to a single set of development plan • drawings there are two program use plans included in the application.The draft decision is currently crafted as one decision detailing a development plan, and two program uses. Board asked if the traffic conditions are different based on the two different program uses. Ms. Duncan referenced the report from AECOM (traffic peer reviewer).The reviewer reported no hotel program use and an increase in residential use will not generate a significant increase in trips over the plan including a hotel —not enough to study.She also read from the civil engineering peer review opinion from Mr. Ross of New England Civil Engineering. Essentially his report indicated no engineering difference was identified when reviewing the two usage plans. The Board requested the drawing of the alternate usage plan B be included in the Decision. Mr.Anderson observed a PUD requires a specific development plan. He was concerned with multi- program uses and previously raised a concern which the City Solicitor has addressed.The developer has been clear and responsive.The draft decision is specific enough in his opinion. Josh Turiel Ward 5 Councillor,238 Lafayette Street—spoke in favor of the project. He acknowledged two program uses might affect pedestrian traffic levels.City recognizes differences in tax revenues depending on the final usage;the City has more to gain tax-wise from hotel and commercial vs. residential and commercial. However the entire project represents a substantial improvement to the current use of the parcel. Jennifer Firth,3 Carpenter Street—spoke in favor of a program use plan that includes a hotel. She does • not support a residential/commercial use plan without hotel. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 Page 4 of 8 • Willilam LeGault City Councillor-At-Large,2 Orne Street; hotel option was presented to City Council as preferred option but not guaranteed. Even without a hotel he is in favor of the project due to the package of improvements and benefits the project represents. Alex Steinbergh,manager Dodge LLC, principal RCG;indicated the developer's preference from the beginning has been to include a hotel as part of this mixed use project.The company has a letter of intent with a hotel group and is bringing in a national brand.The developer is raising equity for the next phase of the project and must have a fall-back in the event a hotel deal falls through. If the only program use plan approved includes a hotel and the developer must return to Planning Board if it falls through, the developer is severely hampered now in recruiting equity partners.They need to be able to move ahead with an alternate program use plan to secure financing. Josh Turiel Ward 5 Councillor,238 Lafayette Street—spoke in favor of the project and both Program Use A and B. He observed this is a blighted block and while Program Use A(hotel) is preferred by most, Program Use B is a net positive for the city.Spoke in support of flexibility for the developer—but also emphasized the public needs to know if the project program use changes in mid-stream.Would prefer people not learn Program Use B implemented by reading it in the paper. If hotel structure is built and decision is made to change its program use,then there should be a mechanism for public hearing. Perhaps the decision can encompass this idea. Various members of the Planning Board spoke in favor of flexibility of program use for the developer, but gave careful attention to the need to inform the public about changes in program use, noting the • general expectation at present is for a hotel to be built.The Board discussed various mechanisms in the process that could trigger notice--and who should be notified: General public Abutters Planning Board and City Planning Department The Board also gave consideration to the longer term possibility:that a hotel is built, occupancy permit issued and used as such for a period of years.Then market conditions change and the decision is made to repurpose the building as residential.The Board collectively believed it to be important that such a change in program use go through the Planning Board and not be allowed without another appearance before the City, based on this decision. Ms.Duncan spoke in favor of adding notification to the draft decision. Suggested the Planning Board condition the decision to require the developer send out notice to both the Planning Board and abutters of which program use plan (A or B) is detailed on the building permit at the time the application is filed. Mr. Picarsic suggested the developer would be willing to add a condition to the PUD approval that if there is a program use change after construction (from hotel to residential),the project must return to the Planning Board for approval as per current zoning requirements. In reply to Board inquiry, Ms. Duncan clarified that a PUD approval has a two-year lifespan.An unexecuted PUD would expire. Mr. Picarsic refined his suggested condition to state that in the event a hotel is constructed,the approved Program Use B(residential) plan would expire. • City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–December 18, 2014 Page 5 of 8 Atty Ofilos observed that if the character of the neighborhood changes over the longer term (10+years) then the City can change the zoning.Zone B5 allows both of these uses now. He is concerned about the enforceability of two decisions from the Planning Board when the application is for a single decision. In his opinion the Board can craft a single decision to comply with the City Solicitor opinion by approving one specific plan and PUD with two specific program uses,a base program use plan and an alternate. In the event of a use change,the PUD approval would not trump the underlying zoning requirements. Ms.Duncan noted that currently the statute allows conversion from residential to a hotel by right. Mr. Zeren, Development Manager, RCG LLC cautioned that change in use be carefully worded to avoid encumbering normal use changes in a mixed use project such as to/from restaurant/retail. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to close the public hearing,seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. Board Deliberations: Chair Puleo read into the record the draft decision.Collectively the Board edited the following sections: • Added 3H traffic management plan to Police and Planning departments • Added Special Conditions G& H o G: Notification prior to issuance of a building permit,applicant to notify all abutters in • the event B program use is implemented. o H. Future changes—once the final certificate of occupancy is issued the approval of the alternate program of shall expire and the zoning ordinance will govern any proposed change in use. • 7.3.1 define as Program Use A and B. • 7.3.3 define Program Use A and B. (edit the draft to be consistent in defining/referencing Program Use A&B) Motion and Roll Call Vote: Matt Veno made a motion to approve the Site Review Plan application, the Planned Unit Development Special Permit, the Flood Hazard Overlay District Soecial Permit and the Stormwater Management Permit subject to all conditions as itemized in the attached decision, seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with seven 7)in favor/Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET(Map 26,Lots 91,9S&97) Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision, North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit.Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping, and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. • City of Salem—Planning Board C Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 Page 6 of 8 • of Environmental Protection.The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Documents and Exhibitions: Riverview Place Site Plans, revised December 12, 2014 Riverview Place Landscape Plan, revised November 6, 2014 Comparative Drainage Analysis Riverview Place, revised September 21, 2014 Riverview Place Parking Connection Plan SK-1, dated October 24, 2014 Stormwater Report for Riverview Place,dated September 21, 2014 3D Model of Site Plan (video), presented December 18,2014 Atty Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover&Frey,27 Congress Street,presented for the applicant. Additional presenters included: • Richard Williams, MSCE, P.E.; Williams&Sparages, 189 North Main Street Suite 101, Middleton, MA(civil engineering) • James K. Emmanuel Associates, 22 Carlton Road, Marblehead, MA(landscape architecture) • Jonathan Stone; Project Manager, O'Sullivan Architects,580 Main Street, Reading, MA • Steven Feinstein; Director of Finance,Symes Associates,50 Dodge Street, Beverly, MA • Landers Symes; President, Symes&Associates, 50 Dodge Street, Beverly, MA Atty Grover introduced developers Landers Symes and Steve Finestein; and professional consultatnts Rich Willliams,Jon Stone and James Emmanuell. Atty Grover advised the applicant appeared before the • Design Review Board (DRB)on December 17, 2014,and received a unanimous vote to approve the design aspects of the project. Mr.Williams reviewed minor changes made in the site plan in response to feedback from the Planning Board: • Sidewalk in front of Building 3 adjacent Mason St will be constructed to match adjacent sidewalk. • Water line that goes into Mason Street, revised to add 2 more gates to enable system to be isolated. • 2 sections of sewer existing on the lot, previous plan was to reuse, now will remove and rebuild with new manholes.Prior to foundation permit the status of the system that discharges to the trunk system will be checked. Mr. Emmanuel[ reviewed the requested fencing details on the updated Landscape Plan. The Planning Board requested the applicant consider providing compost pickup. Mr.Symes advised the problem is finding a vendor who will pick-up from this type of larger scale facility.Applicant is willing to look into the request. Mr. Clarke strongly encouraged the Planning Board to look for this accommodation on all appropriate projects going forward. Mr.Stone presented a 3D model of the site plan (video). • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 Page 7 of 8 Mr. Feinstein advised next steps after Planning Board decision include: • MEPA comments are due January 9, 2015 • Need to file Chapter 91,working their timetable. • Both these steps will go faster when the applicant is able to submit to them a decision from the Planning Board. Chair Puleo opened the meeting to public comment. Jennifer Firth,3 Carpenter Street;stated the Design Review Boad (DRB) did a great job in working with the applicant on this project. Basic comment from those who will overlook this location,the scale is simply too large.She asked to know the square footage of the site and percent of the site covered by impervious material. • Rich Williams advised the proposed impervious area is 130,000 square feet,about 3 acres.The site is 4.4 acres total. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Randy Clarke The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson Ms. Sides Mr. Clarke Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. Board Deliberations. Chair Puleo read the amended draft decision into the record which reiterates all of the details of the . original April 19, 2009, decision.The draft includes feedback from the DRB meeting on December 17, 2014. The Board carefully reviewed each section of the draft and made the following edits: • P2#1, Design Review Board add date 12/17/2014 • Sg updated to new standard language from City Planning Department • #28 Maintenance updated to new standard language from City Planning Department to include language stating the applicant will investigate composting services. • #9 f edit language to convey that if City decides not to build traffic signal applicant will contribute an equal amount toward traffic mitigation. Value to be agreed upon by applicant and city engineer. • #9 g traffic island,specify at the intersection of Flint and Oak streets. • P3 Flood Hazard findings,#1 to read: "The proposed uses comply in all respect to the provision of the North River Canal Corridor Zoning District." • P3 Flood Hazard findings,#2, line 4 edit needed: "....The event of flooding of the lots(s)or adjacent lots(s)caused by either overspill from..." Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review Decision(dated April 17, 2009), North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Stormwater Management Permit, seconded by Noah Koretz. The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—December 18, 2014 Page 8 of 8 Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. The amendment is hereby incorporated with the original decision and made a part of these minutes. Old/New Business None Adjournment Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to adiourn the meeting,seconded by Noah Koretz. The vote was unanimous with seven(7)in favor(Mr. Puleo,Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 10:15pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 3/19/2015 • Know your rights tinder the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A§18-25 and City Ordinance§2-2028 through§2-2033. 4 ��CQIdD17'q`�Di CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS q# DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAY: 978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner DATE: December 11, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting-December 18, 2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda for 12/18/2014 regular meeting ➢ Planner's Memo APPROVAL OF MINUTES • • December 4, 2014 Meeting Minutes REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219 &231-251 Washington Street(Map 34,Lots 0403, 0405 & 0406) Enclosed is a draft decision for review. The Planning Board will need to articulate findings associated with a Planned Unit Development Special Permit>to lie included in a final Planning Board decision. 2. 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street-"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lot 91, 95 &97) m will d is a draft decision for review. On December 17 the project�n.I be before the Design Enclose tI ) g Review Board. Comments from the Design Review Board will be integrated into a draft decision on December 18tH for Planning Board review. 3. Oshorne Hills/Strongwater Crossing Enclosed is.a letter from Osborne Hills Realty Trust to request a Surety Bond Release for Phase 11B of the Strongwater Crossing Development. OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS Expanded Environmental Notification Form Riverview l'.ace CITY OF SALEM • T PLANNING NIN BOARD 1014 DEC 22 P12: 12 CITY CLIER"u S+ti !\i .�H.1.41. tl'1JJ. Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and Stormwater Management :Permit Decision 9-11 DODGE STREET,217-219 & 231-251 WASHINGTON STREET (Map 34, Lots 403, 405, and 406) December 22. 2014 Dodge Area, LLC 17 Ivaloo Street Suite 100 Somerville, MA 02143 RE: Planned Unit Development.Special Permit, Site Plan Review, Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and Stormwater Management Permit Decision for the proposed development at 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219 & 231-251 Washington Street. • On Septen*er 4, 2014, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing under ' Section 7.3,Planned Unit Development, Section 9.5, Site Plan Review, Section 8.1, Flood i Hazard Overlay District(FHOD) ofthe City of'Salem Zoning Ordinance, and Section 37, Stormwater Management Permit of the City of Salem Code of Ordinances at the request of I Dodge ,Area, LLC;for the properties located at 9-11,Dodge Street, 217-219&2')1-251 f Washington Street,(Map 34,Lots 403, 405, and 406). The proposed project includes the new construction of an approximately 190,000-square foot mixed-use development with associated landscaping, and pedestrian and multimodal transportation improvements. There are two possible use programs: Base Program A: 190,000 square foot new mixed use development Nvid) '1 i I hotel rooms,84 residential units (including live-work units); and approximately 20,000 square feet of commercial space; and`Program B: Commercial/Residential Mixed-Use: 190,000 square foot 1 mixed-use development with no hotel and 145 residential units (including live-work units), and approximately 28,000 square feet of commercial space. Both use programs will include a 1 minimum ol'245 parking spaces of which a minimunm of 38 will be made available to the public. The Public Hearing was continued to :September 18, 2014; October 16;2014'(but was not heard on that date), November 6,2014, and November 20, 2014. The Public Hearing was closed on Dec-ember 18, 2014. r 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 'PHONE978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • •WWW.SALEM.COM l i i In advance.of the October 16, 2014 public heating, the applicant submitted a letter requesting a • Storms+"iter Management Permit, per the requirements of Chapter 37 of the City of Salem Code Of Ordinances. The Planning Board, after numerous public hearing sessions and review of submitted materials and testimony,hereby finds that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Sec. 7.3 Planned Unit Development; as follows: 1 7.3.1 Purpose—Planned unit development is designed to provide various types of land use which can be combined in compatible relationship with each other as part of a totally.planned development. As proposed, the Planned Unit Development (PUD)incorporates a precise development plan for two use programs; Base Program A: 190,000 square foot new-mixed use j development with i I 1 hotel rooms, 84 residential units (including live-y"ork units), and approximately 20,000 square:feet of commercial space; and Program B: Commercial/Residential Mixed-Use: 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with no hotel and 145 residential units 1 (including live-work units), and approximately 28,000 square feet of commercial space(Program "A"and Program "B'). Both use programs provide a mix of uses that:are compatible with each other, thereby meeting the purpose and intent of good zoning practices and the master plan of.the City of:Salem. t 7.3.2 Applicability —The proposed development parcel is at.least five(5) times the required minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet in the B5, Central Development District: The lot size is • S 65,1 73) square Leet +/- substantially exceeding the requirement bf 10,000 square feet. The underlying zoning district of the proposed development.parce$ is B5 Central Development District, which is eligible.for PUD treatment. $ 7.3.3 Uses—The proposed uses, as included in Program A and Program B, as described in this decision.in Section 7:3.1, are allowed in a_PUD development. ; 7.3.3.1 - Both proposed Planned Unit Development use programs contain multi-family {{{ residential development that is compatible with adjacent existing residential development and potential development of the surrounding neighborhood because adjacent parcels are either zoned B5 or R3 (across the street). 7:3.3.2 - The applicant has submitted a plan for the total property and has in clear detail by f engineering and architectural specifications and drawings shown-the area to be developed and the means that will be employed to protect the abutting property and the health safety, and t welfare and privacyenjoyed thereon. The project and both use programs have been peer $ reviewed by civi! and traffic:engineers who have confirmed that there will not be negative ! impacts on abutting property subject to conditions contained within this decision. d • The Planning.Board hereby makes the following findings pertaining'to-the Planned Unit Development Special Permit application: 1. The proposed planned unit development is in Harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the master plan ofthe Cit;' of Salem as this project will add vitality to the downtown, provide a mix of residential units and commercial spaces, improve the streetscape, improve pedestrian accessibility, and generate tax revenue for the City. 2. The mixture of uses in the planned unit development is determined to be sufficiently advantageous to render it appropriate to depart from the normal requirements of the district. Specifically; this is a significant mixed-use development of approximately 190,000 square feet that will greatly enhance this section of the downtown. The mix of housing; including live-work space; commercial use, and a potential hotel will add to the vibrancy, vitality, and aesthetics of downtown, providing substantial public benefit. i i. The planned unit development would not result in a net negative environmental impact, based on the information from the:Environmental Impact Statement and plans, and the review of the project by the Planning Board's civil and traffic engineering consultants. The Planning Board hereby makes the following findings pertaining to the Flood Hazard District • Special Permit Application: 1. The proposed uses comply in all respect to the uses and provisions of the underlying zoning district and the Planned Unit Development provision. 2. A portion of the site is within the 100-year FEMA coastal floodplain. ]'here are adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets and property,;particularly in the event offlooding of the lot(s) i or adjacent lots(s) caused by either the overspill from water bodies or high runoff. In the case of a 100-year flood, the upper parking deck will remain accessible during a flooding event. The regrading of Dodge Street will allow circulation to the other areas of the site. Adequate drainage will be constructed to drain the lowest level of the garage should it fill during a flood event. Additionally, the Development Plan includes raising a portion of the site, so that the finished floor level is located above the 100-year FEMA coastal floodplain elevation. 3. All utilities including gas, electricity, fuel; water and sewage disposal will be located and constructed so as to protect against breaking, leaking, short-circuiting, grounding or igniting or any other damage due to flooding.The Development Plan and project j 1 f narrative indicate that all utilities and essential equipment will be located above floodplain level • 4. The proposed development will not be located within a coastal high hazard area (Zone VG on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps). At a_regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on December 1.8, 2014, the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Kore. tz,Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset),and none(0) opposed to approve the Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and Stormwater Management Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the plans entitled "Salem Gateway:Washington and Dodge Street Infrastructure Improvements,Salem, MA Plans 13-107"C1.0 to C7.I'prepared by Design. Consultants, Inc. dated July 10, 2014 (Revised October 6: November 4),"North Building Residential/Commercial Schematic Plan" dated December 3,2014,prepared by RCG LLC, Landscape Plans L-1 to L-11 prepared by Landworks Studio, and Lighting Plans LCIa and LCI c prepared by Available Light; Architectural plans AA100.1-106, 300-303 prepared by Khalsa Design, Inc. 2. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed by the City Plainer and ifdeemed necessary by the City Planner, shall.be brought to the Planr.ing:Board. Any waiver of conditions contained • within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. ! 3. Construction Practices All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the following conditions: a. Exterior construction work shall not be conducted between the hours of 5:00 PM and 5:00 AM the following day on weekdays or at any time on Sundays or Holidays. Any interior work conducted during these times will not involve heavy machinery which could generate C disturbing noises. iE b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. c. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM. There shall be no drilling or blasting on Saturdays, Sundays. or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not track 4 • t s silt on public ways. • e. 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. f All construction vehicles left overnight at the site, must be located completely on the site or parked at another off-street parking lot. g.A Construction Management Plan and Construction Schedule shall be submitted by the applicant to the City Planner for review and approval 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. It. A Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to the City Planner and Police Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The Traffic Management Plan shall include the proposed communication methods, including notification to the Building Salem Coordinator, to keep the public informed regarding activities affecting vehicular and pedestrian circulation during construction. i • i. All sidewalks, roadways,utilities,.landscaping; etc, damaged during construction shall be replaced or repaired to their pre-construction condition, or better. t I 4. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department in accordance with the applicable fire prevention regulations. The locations of all fire Hydrants shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of any building permit. t 5. Building Inspector } All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector consistent with the i# current version of the State Building Code, Massachusetts Architectural Access Board E regulations and Massachusetts Energy Codes. t R 6. Board of Health t a. . Tlie individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name, address; and telephone nu nber.of the project(site)manager who will be o7 site and directly responsible for the construction of the project. r 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 t • F f the site certifies that soil and ground wafer on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use.. Since there are individual parcels combined into one site only that • parcel(s) that is issued a DEP tracking Number.is expected to meet this condition c. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. d. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticideapplicator to assess and exterminate pests in the area prior to construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent. A pest control management plan shall be developed and submitted to the Health Agent prior to the start of any demolition work.. 1 C. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. j £ The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a.written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. t P g. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris; vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated f during demolition and/or construction. 1 • h. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for.lire fighting. i. 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. j. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health.Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. k. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in a sound manner as described to the Board of Health and in compliance with existing Federal, State and Local laws. 1. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete lot-final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. • in. In developments of 10 or more units; the developer shall develop a grease management • plan to prevent grease from entering the city sewers that is in compliance with the requirements of the City Engineer n. Salem sits in a Radon Zone 1 and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely. Therefore; the installation of radon mitigation systems is strongly recommended. 7. Department of Public Services All work shall comply with the requirements of the Department of Public Services. 8. Conservation Commission i All work shall comply with the requirements of the Conservation Commission as the proposed site is located partially within the FEMA flood zone. 9. Lighting a. Any light used to illuminate parking area shall be arranged as to reflect light away from 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. 1 c. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to • the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent the construction on the Project or portions of the Project are completed such that a Certificate of Occupancy could be issued prior to completion of all exterior lighting, for a portion of the.Project or the Project in its entirety, the applicant may provide a performance bond or surety in an amount and form subject to approval of the City Planner to ensure that the work is completed within a reason able timeframe. 'flee applicant may submit requests to the City Planner for partial releases of said surety based on work completed. 10. HVAC. 1 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 Plattner for review and approval prior to installation. I I1. Noise t � t 14VAC units shall be sufficiently buffered and the applicant shall take steps to further miiigate noise emanating from the HVAC units(s) if the Board of Health receives any complaints. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the guideline for reviewing such noise is that the broadband sound level should not increase by more than 10 dB(A)above the ambient levels measured at i the property line. • 1 i i t l 12. Landscaping • a- All landscaping shall be done in accordance with the approved set of plans. b. Trees shall be a minimum diameter of 33 Y2"dbh (diameter breast height). c. Maintenance of all landscaping, excepting street trees that will become property of City of Salem, shall be the responsibility of the applicant,his successors or assigns..The applicant, his successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs (including street trees) for a two (2)year period. d. Final completed landscaping shall be subject to approval by the,City.Planner prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that the construction is finished such that a Certificate of Occupancy couldbe issued for a Portion of the Project or the Project in its entirety and that the weather conditions(e.g., late fall, winter or early spring) are such that the landscaping cannot reasonably be finished, the applicant may provide a performance bond or surety in an amount and form subject to approval of the City Planner to ensure that the work is completed within a reasonable timeframe. The applicant may submit requests to the City Planner for partial releases of said surety based on work completed. 13. Maintenance a. Refuse removal ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. "Refuse removal"includes recycling, which shall be the. • responsibility of the owner, his successors or assigns.The owner shall provide adequate facilities to ensure all users are able to recycle their trash. Owner is to enter into a contract with a company of the owner's choice to arrange pick-up of recyclable material. A copy of this contract is to be submitted to the City Engineer. For clarity, this provision does not apply to publicly owned rights of way and streets. l b. The developer, his successors or assigns shall be responsible for the shoveling and/or snowplowing of the sidewalk for all building frontage along.Dodge Street, Washington Street; and Dodge Street Court. c. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. 14. As-built Plans As-built Plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and Department of Public Services prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The As-Built plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer in electronic file formal suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of the Cenificate of Occupancy. i • A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a • certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City'Engineer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 'ro the extent that construction work has been completed sufficient for a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for a portion of the Project or the Project in its entirety but that the As-Built plans have not yet been fully completed(for said portion of the Projector the Project in.its entirety),the applicant may provide aperfonnance bond or surety in an amount and form subject to approval of the City Planner to ensure that the As-Built Plans are completed within a.reasonable timeframe. 15. Clerk of the Works 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 City Planner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties acknowledge the Project shall be subject to controlled construction, which requires oversight by licensed engineers and architects. Accordingly, it is the understanding of the Board, the City Planner and the Applicant that the Clerk of the Works is expected to oversee and review all civil/site improvements related to the project located within the public way, including all utility connections to publicly owned infrastructure.. it is also mutually understood that the expense associated with a Clerk of the Worts shall be for a reasonable number of hours • and at a customary rate for such service. t 16. Violations Violations of any condition contained herein shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless the violation o.i'such condition is waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 17. Special Conditions a. Stormwater Management Permit Applicant to revise Stormwater Management Report with O&Y1 Plan.to incorporate appropriate detention and groundwater infiltration system, and submit to City Engineer for.review and approval prior to issuance of a Foundation or Building Permit. Revised design to detain roof runoff must demonstrate that groundwater recharge and pre and post runoff rates meet f requirements of Stormwater Standards for non-tidal discharge. t b. Existing Utility Relocation L. Applicant to revise site plans to include replacement of remaining Dodge. Street drain pipe and submit to the City Planner and City Engineer for review and approval prior to i issuance of a Building Permit. • tt i I 2. Prior to issuance of Building Permit, applicant to complete additional field, investigations on the interce for sewers and South River drainage conduit and revise the • g P g > utility relocation plans to include the location of all utilities to be relocated and/or installed between the proposed building and the South River conduit Willi adequate plan, profile, and cross-section views with sufficient detail to demonstrate'to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the utilities may be relocated and are constructible within the proposed utility corridor. Plans shall include additional detail of water replacement and connections to existing water main at each end of proposed relocation for adequate- valving and thrust restraint to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, and also delineate and formalize the proposed easement layout and language for utilities to be located on Applicant's property. 3. Applicant to submit additional information from their geotechnical engineer to the City Engineer regarding proposed vibrations from pile foundation adjacent to Dodge Street interceptor sewer and modify the foundation design or protect/rehabilitate/replace sewer prior to issuance of a Foundation Permit. Applicant to complete CCTV pipeline inspection of the Dodge Street interceptor sewer before and after completing foundation work and submit to City Engineer, and, if required, protect/rehabilitate/replace sewer line to address deficiencies or defects observed. c. Utilities • Applicant to submit additional information to the City Planner and City Engineer once architectural plans are finalized, to demonstrate the proposed,fire hydrants and connections meet j requirements of Salem Fire Department and that proposed sewer, drain, and water service i connections are in agreement between the architectural and civil plans;and that the design will ' collect rainfall runoff arid detain water as modeled in the revised Stormwater Management Report,prior to issuance of a Building Permit. d. Site Development Plans Applicant to submit, additional information to the City Engineer on the number and location of all existing utility services to all buildings, and revise plans to identify the number and location of all utilities to be capped or plugged. Applicant is to complete the abandonment of the service connections prior to issuance of a Demolition Permit. c. Traffic 1. Applicant to install a Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) system, or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon,to supplement the proposed mid-block crosswalk across Washington Street at Dodge Street. A detailed design and specifications, including but not limited to a system layout,number of beacons, push button locations, conduit and pull box layout, j • post and foundation information,power source, and system operations shall be provided • to the City Planner for review and approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Installation to be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. In addition to the Washington Street north leg crosswalk; the proponent is proposing to upgrade the existing crosswalk across the east leg of Washington Street. This crosswalk to be enhanced with Pedestrian Warning signs (WI 1-2,WI 6-7p), similar to the other proposed crosswalks. installation to be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. �. At the intersection of Dodge Street and Dodge Street Court, the proposed Pedestrian Warning signs (WI 1-2, W16-7p) are not necessary for the Dodge Street Court approaches since they are Stop sign controlled and are to be eliminated. s 4. Pedestrian Wanting signs (W] 1-2, WI 6-7p) must be provided for the crosswalk across Dodge Street and installation to be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of 1 Occupancy. ! I 5. The Applicant to install crosswalks that meet the City standard, which is an inlaid li • preformed thermoplastic asphalt pavement marking system. The proponent shall coordinate with the City Engineer in regard to the exact specifications. The Applicant to coordinate with the City Plarmer regarding the specific pattern. j 6. It is expressly noted that certain proposed parking and roadway circulation changes are E subject to approval of Council in accordance with the Salem Traffic Ordinance. f. S alem Redevelopment Authority All work'shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Redevelopment Authority. g Notification Prior to the issuance of a,Building Permit, the applicant shall notify the City of Salem and } all abutters within 300 feet if the development proceeds with alternate use program "B" as 1, described in this decision in Section 7.3.1. h. Future Changes Once the final Certificate of Occupancy is issued, the approval of the alternate,program of uses shall expire and the 'Zoning Ordinance will govern any proposed change of use. 4 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 die 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. . ''1r l Charles M. uleo, Chair • • CITY OF SALEM -�j PLANNING BOARD ZON 0€C 22 P l: 03 CITY CL r .Fl_€: : Decision Amendment to Site Plan Review,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Approval of Stormwater Management Permit 72 Flint St. and 67-71 Mason St. (Map 26, Lots 91,.95 & 97) December 22, 2014 Riverview Place LLC c/o Tinti, Quinn, Grover& Frcy,P.C. 27 Congress Street Suite 414, Salem, MA RE: Amendment to Site Plan Review, North River Canal Corridor District • Special:Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Amendment for a previously approved decision and a new Stormwater Management Permit for Riverview Place at 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street. On Thursday!, July 17, 2014, the Planning Board of the City ol'Salem opened a Public Hearing regarding the application of Riverview Place LLC,for an amendment to the original April 19, 2009 Decision under Section 9.5 Site Plan Review, Section 8..4, North River Canal Corridor District Special.Permit, and Section 8.1, Flood Hazard Overlay District(FHOD)of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, and a Stormwater Management Permit for the property located at the former Salem and Suede Property at 72 Flint Street,67-71 Masini Street (Map 26,Lots 91, 95, & 97). The Public Hearing was continued to September 4, 2014 (no evidence was heard), September 18, 2014 (no evidence was heard),. October 16, 2014, November 6, 2014 I (no evidence was heard), November 20, 2014 (no evidence was heard) and closed on December 18, 2014. The proposed amendments include changes to the previously approved buildings, landscaping, and parking, primarily in order to meei the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Department of Environmental Protection. Proposed ; changes include the change of ground level use in the largest building From residential 1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 { °W W W.SALEM.COM 4 units to parking; a reduction in the mass of the structured garage due to the elimination of a level of parking as a result of moving parking spaces to the ground, level of the • largest building and a reduction to 10 commercial use spaces as approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals (April 22, 2014). In addition, there are design changes to the previously approved buildings to improve consistency with the objectives of the NRCC Master Plan and to better integrate the project with the surrounding neighborhood. The approved number of units and footprint of the buildings have not changed substantially as a result of the proposed modifications. The project will consist of 130 residential units, approximately 5,000 square feet of commercial space and 282 parking spaces reduced from the 309 spaces previously approved in the April 19, 2009 decision. The Planning Board, after public hearing sessions and review of submitted materials and testimony, hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the previously approved project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Sec. 8.4 North River Canal Corridor District.Special Permit, as follows: 1. The residential uses abut residential uses on Mason Street and Flint Street; 2. Multi-family residential uses retain first floor commercial use on a main corridor— Commercial uses are proposed for the building on Mason Street. 3. A variance was granted by the Board of Appeals on October 17, 2007 allowing common residential building entrances. In considering approval of the Special Permit; as amended, the Planning Board found • that the goals of the North River Canal Corridor Plan; as stated in the Salem Zoning Ordinance, were met, as follows: 1. Create appropriate development while preserving our historic neighborhood character The proposed project was unanimously recommended for approval with conditions by the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) on December 17, 2014 and February 25, 2009. The DRB's role is to review proposals to ensure they are designed to complement and harmonize with adjacent land uses with respect to architecture, scale, landscaping and screening. The applicant responded to concerns expressed by the DRB In a recommendation letter to the Planning Board dated December 18, 2014, the DRB details how the applicant satisfactorily resolved these concerns. 2. Address transportation issues for existing and new developments The project is located within walking distance of the Salem MBTA commuter rail stop. The developer has also agreed to mitigation measures, specified in the conditions below, to address existing traffic congestion problems in the neighborhood. 3. Enhance the public realm in keeping with our unique neighborhood character The project provides public access to the canal and includes walkways throughout the site and landscaping along the water's edge. The project includes pedestrian improvements to facilitate access to the canal and throughout the site through wider sidewalks, additional plantings and a new terrace. Provisions have been made for walkways to be connected to abutting properties. In considering approval of the Special Permit, as amended, the Planning Board also found that the proposed project complies with the North River Canal Corridor Master Plan, as follows: 1. Redevelops a key site in the NRCC, the Salem Suede site; 2. Enhances the streetscape along Mason Street; 3. Provides an easement to the City of Salem to allow it to construct an extension of the Commercial Street public roadway across the development site; and 4. Provides off street parking for adjacent Flint Street residents. On October 17, 2007,the Salem Board of Appeals granted Variances from the NRCC Zoning District 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 as amended by Decision dated April 22, 2014. The Planning Board hereby makes the following findings pertaining to the Flood • Hazard District Special Permit Application: 1) The proposed uses comply in all respect to the uses and provisions of the North River Canal Corridor Zoning District. 2) A portion of the site is within the 100-year FEMA floodplain. There is adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site, and in relation to adjacent streets and property; particularly in the event of flooding of the lots(s) or adjacent lots(s) caused by either the overspill from water bodies or high runoff. In the case of a 100-year flood, the project site has access to both Flint Street and Mason Street for accessibility during a flood event. Mason Street is located well above the Base Flood Elevation as determined by the FEMA Flood Zone baseline for 100-year flood to provide circulation in a flood event. Residential units are above the 100- year flood level and any structures below this level will have non-residential uses that will be flood proofed in compliance with the applicable requirements of the Massachusetts State Building Code. 3) All utilities including gas, electricity, fuel, water and sewage disposal will be located and constructed so as to protect against breaking, leaking, short circuiting, grounding or igniting or any other damage due to flooding. The Application for Wetlands and Flood Hazard Districts Special Permit dated June • 26, 2014 state that all utilities and essential equipment will be located above floodplain level. 4) The proposed development will not be located within a coastal high hazard area (Zone VE on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps). The proposed development is located in Zone A of the Flood Hazard District. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on December 18 2014, the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Koretz, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed to approve Amendment to the Site Plan Review,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit and to approve a Stormwater Management Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the Project Plans listed below entitled:"Riverview Place Salem, MA"prepared by William & Sparges, O'Sullivan Architects, James K. Emmanuel Associates, AECOM. A. Project Plans: Title Drawing Date Last Revision Date • Index Plan. IN-1 6/26/2014 12/12/2014 William& Riverview Place Sparges Existing Conditions EX-1 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William& Sparges Site Layout Plan LO-1 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William& Sparges Detail Development DEV-1 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William& Plan Sparges Detail Development DEV-2 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William & Plan Sparges Site Utility Plan UTIL-I 6/25/2014 12/12/20014 William & Sparges Lighting/Photometric LP-1 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William & Plan Sparges Details Riverview DET-1 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William& Place Sparges Details Riverview DET-2 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William & Place Sparges Details Riverview DET-3 6/25/2014 12/12/2014 William & Place Sparges • Pre-Existing PRE- 6/25/2014 William & • Watershed & Soils WSD Sparges Ma Existing Watershed EX-WSD 6/25/2014 William & & Soils Map Sar es Proposed Watershed PR-WSD 6/25/2014 William & Map S ares Riverview Place 6/26/2014 12/17/2014 O'Sullivan Architectural Plans Architects Landscape Plan L-1 6/26/2014 11/6/2014 James K Emmanuel Associates Fence Plan F-1 10/30/2014 James K. Emmanuel Associates Parking Connection Sk-1 6/26/2014 11/14/2014 James K. Plan Emmanuel Associates Traffic Signing and March, AECOM Pavement Marking 2009 Plan • 2. Amendments Any 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. 3. Landscaping a. Applicant to submit landscaping plans and confirm plantings are in conformance in vicinity of bioretention area between civil and landscaping plans for review and approval by the City Planner prior to issuance of a building permit. b. Maintenance of all landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant, their successors or assigns. The applicant, their successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two (2) year period, 4. 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 Electrician for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. • 5. Construction Practices All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the following conditions: • a. All provisions in the City of Salem's Code of Ordinance, Chapter 22, Noise Control, shall be strictly adhered to. b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of demolition and construction of the project. c. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM. There shall be no drilling, blasting or rock hammering on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on surrounding roadways as they leave the site. e. 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. f. .All construction vehicles left overnight at the site, must be located completely on • the site. g. A Construction Management Plan and Construction Schedule shall be submitted by the applicant to the City Planner for review and approval 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. 6. Clerk of the Works 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 City Planner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties acknowledge the Project shall be subject to controlled construction, which requires oversight by licensed engineers. and architects. Accordingly, it is the understanding of the Board, the City Planner and the Applicant that the Clerk of the Works is expected to oversee and review all civil/site improvements related to the project located within the public way, including all utility connections to publicly owned infrastructure. It is also mutually understood that the expense associated with a Clerk of the Works shall be for a reasonable number of hours and at a customary rate for such service. 7. Design Review Board • a. All requirements as set forth by the Design Review Board(DRB) shall be strictly adhered to. Violation of DRB requirements shall be considered a violation of the Planning Board decision approval. b. The applicant shall submit final construction plans for review and approval by the DRB prior to obtaining a building permit. c. The materials and color samples shall be in accordance with those submitted to and approved by the DRB on December 17, 2014,as well as described in a memo reviewed by the DRB titled "Riverview Place - Salem, MA - Materials List" and dated December 12, 2014 at the December 17, 2014 meeting; however final mock-ups and color samples for windows and other treatments shall be submitted for review and approval by the DRB prior to installation. d. The windows (style, color, appearance, and general design) on all stair towers shall be in conformance with the design presented to the DRB on December 3, 2014 (not what was presented on December 17, 2014). e. The signage for the building and the site shall conform to the City of Salem's Sign Ordinance and be reviewed and approved by the DRB prior to obtaining a sign permit. • 8. Conservation Commission a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Conservation Commission b. The applicant shall receive all necessary approvals from the Salem Conservation Commission. 9.Signage and Traffic Calming The applicant,his successors, or assigns shall be responsible for the following signage and traffic calming measures, provided that any required City Council approvals are granted: a. ,Installation of an electronic speed monitor on Mason Street, with the location to be determined by the Traffic Division Commander; b. Installation of signage and pavement markings as shown on the submitted plans; c. Placement of"No Parking-Tow Zone" signage on Mason Street on both sides of the site driveway, to be approved by the Traffic Division Commander; d. Signage at the Mason St. driveway prohibiting the entrance and exit of trucks (to be added to a revised signage plan); e. Installation of a yellow flashing beacon at the intersection of Flint Street and Mason Street, with the type and exact location to be approved by the Traffic • Division Commander; f. The applicant to prepare complete plans and specifications for the design of a traffic signal to be built by the City at the intersection of Mason Street, Tremont • Street and the site's Mason Street driveway prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. However, should the City decide against,proceeding with said traffic signal, the applicant to contribute funding for traffic mitigation in the general area prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The dollar value of the traffic mitigation to be equal to the value of the engineered plans for the traffic signal; said amount to be agreed upon by the applicant and the City Engineer. g. Should the Planning Department determine that a traffic island at the intersection of Oak Street and Flint Street is necessary,the developer shall cause the same to be installed at its sole cost and expense within the timeframe determined by the Planning Department. During the interim, the developer shall be responsible for installing signage and making pavement markings at the intersection of Oak Street and Flint Street as directed by:the Planning Department on the basis of recommendations made by the City Engineer and/or Traffic Division Commander. 10. Affordable Housing The Petitioner shall place an Affordable Housing Restriction on the development ensuring that.at least thirteen (13) of the one hundred and thirty (130) units shall be affordable. The form of the restriction is to be approved by the City Planner and recorded with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. The affordable housing restriction is to be in accordance with the eligibility criteria for the Commonwealth Department of • Housing and Community Development's Subsidized Housing Inventory for the purpose of ensuring that at least thirteen (13) dwelling units will be restricted as affordable housing for households whose annual incomes are eighty percent(80%) or less of area median income with rents affordable to low and moderate income households, by standards established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for a period of ninety-nine (99) years from the date of the first occupancy permit. 11. Parking Spaces for Flint Street Residents Twelve (12) on-site parking spaces are to be reserved in perpetuity for the sole use of Flint Street residents who live between Mason Street and Bridge Street. The proposed mechanism for reserving the spaces is to be submitted and approved by the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Spaces are to be maintained year-round. 12. Roadway Easement The applicant, upon"taking title to the premises, will grant to the City of Salem an easement to construct an extension of the Commercial Street public roadway across the site in the location shown on the site plan at any time within a fifteen (15) year period beginning on the date of the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy. If no road is constructed within this time period, the easement shall expire. The easement is to be in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor and to be recorded by the developer • upon approval by the City Solicitor. The easement is to be recorded upon issuance of • final Certificate of Occupancy. 13. Bypass Pumping and Sedimentation Control With respect to that portion of the Mason Street storm drain system believed to pass through the site, applicant is to maintain bypass pumping twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week during wet weather conditions and plug the outfall to avoid sedimentation of the North River during demolition. 14. Gas Lines Applicant shall cut and cap the gas lines at the existing main prior to issuance of a demolition permit. 15. Drainage and Bio-Retention Plans Applicant shall submit flnal plans following architectural drawing completion to the City Engineer for review and approval confirming roof runoff will be received by roof drainage and locations of roof drainage piping and garage oil-water separator piping conform with civil conceptual plans prior to issuance of foundation permit and/or building permit. 16. Maintenance of Catch Basins and Stormceptors Applicant shall submit a narrative describing the frequency of cleaning and maintenance of catch basins and Stormceptors and clearly define responsible party for • maintenance, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 17. Performance of Drain Piping and Stormceptor Applicant shall submit revised plans showing backflow prevention downstream of bioretention area to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of foundation permit and/or building permit. Applicant shall add backflow prevention between bioretention area and closed drainage piping. 18. Replacement of Mason Street Water Valve Applicant shall install triple gate intersections at proposed connections to City water pipes on Flint and Mason Street. 19. Utilities a. Applicant shall confirm all utility service connections are capped at mains in City street and cap them if they remain connected prior to issuance of Foundation Permit and/or Building Permit. b. Underground utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 20. Sewer Infrastructure a. Applicant shall submit revised plans detailing limits and extent of sewer • infrastructure removal on site to the City Engineer for review and approval _— d prior to issuance of Foundation Permit and/or Building Permit. Applicant shall remove all abandoned onsite sewer infrastructure prior to issuance of • Foundation Permit and/or Building Permit. b. Applicant shall revise plans to show replacement of onsite sewer infrastructure, clean and CCTV inspect pipe in Flint Street connecting development to the SESD interceptor sewer, submit results to City Engineer, and rehabilitate pipe as required by the City Engineer. c. Applicant shall replace the sewer infrastructure (2 manholes and 2 pipe reaches) in accordance with revised plans said plans to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Foundation Permit and/or Building Permit. 21. Mason Street Drainage a. Applicant shall locate the existing City drain pipe and submit a plan to the City Engineer detailing proposed replacement of drain piping for approval prior to Foundation Permit. b. The applicant shall replace the drain pipe and route the drain-pipe through the site parallel to a private drain pipe and grant the City of Salem an easement for access and future maintenance. 22. Mason Street Sidewalk • a. Applicant shall submit revised plans detailing limits and extent of sidewalk replacement on Mason Street to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permit. b. Applicant shall remove and replace existing sidewalk in front of project area in accordance with the plans approved by the City Engineer to match the recently replaced sidewalks on Mason Street. 23. Irrigation Applicant shall revise plans to include proposed locations of irrigation piping and sprinkler heads to the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 24. 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. n� c. The developer will give the Health Agent a copy of the 21 E report. • d. A radon remediation kit is installed and is operational in each below grade dwelling unit, if any. e. A radon test is conducted following installation and operation of the remediation kit. f. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. g. A copy of the Demolition Notice sent to the DEP, From BWPAO6, must be sent to the Health Agent. h. An initial rodent assessment and a weekly report shall be sent to the Health Agent for the first 30 days during demolition, then monthly inspections and reports sent to the Health Agent until such time the report indicates no rodent activity. Rodent control is to be in place one week prior to demolition. Abutters are to be notified 72 hours prior to demolition. i. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate pests in the area prior to construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent. j. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. • k. Prior to renovation/demolition of any structures, a Certified Asbestos Inspector must inspect all buildings and send a report to the Health Agent. If asbestos is found, the owner must comply with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's regulations including 310CMR 7.15. 1. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. in. 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. n. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for firefighting. o. 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. p. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. q. 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. • r. The drainage system for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Northeast Mosquito Control and Wetland Management District. • s. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. 25. Fire Department a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department in accordance with the applicable fire prevention regulations. b. Applicant shall use the Salem Fire Department's Standard Operating Guideline for installation, placement and marking of components, should solar/photovoltaic panels become part of the buildings. c.On site fire hydrants shall have a minimum of an 8 inch diameter main. 26. Building Inspector All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building inspector consistent with the current version of the State Building Code, Massachusetts Architectural Access Board regulations and Massachusetts Energy Codes . 27. Exterior Elevations Elevations shall be in accordance with the approved plans. 28. Maintenance • a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. "Refuse removal" includes recycling, which shall be the responsibility of the owner, their successors or assigns. The owner shall provide adequate facilities to ensure all users are able to recycle their trash. Owner is to enter into a contract with a company of the owner's choice to arrange pick-up of recyclable material. A copy of this contract is to be submitted to the City Engineer. b. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. c. Maintenance of all landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant, his successors or assigns. d. The applicant shall use its best efforts to engage a waste hauler for compost that will regularly accept organic wastes from on-site residents for off-site composting. Organic wastes shall not be stored on-site in a manner that allows nuisance conditions to develop. 29. As-built Plans As-built plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Engineering Department prior to the issuance,of the final • Certificate of Occupancy. 30. Violations Violations of any condition shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless the violation of such condition is waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 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 of 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 Chairman • • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD r rola DEC 22 P r 08 FILE # ffTY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. December 22,2014 Osbome Hills Realty Trust Atm. Paul DiBiase P.O.Bos 780 Lynn6eld,MA 01940 RE: Request for Partial Release of Surety Bond for Phase IIB at Strongwater Crossing(Osborne Hills) Dear Mr.DiBiase: The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, December 18, 2014 to discuss your request for the partial reduction of the surety bond for Phase IIB for the Osborne Hills Subdivision located off Marlborough Road. The Planning Board voted by a vote of 7-0 in favor(Mr: Puleo, Mr. Anderson, I& Veno, Mr. Koretz,Ms. Sides,Mr. Clarke,Mr. Griset) and none(0)opposed, to grant the partial reduction of the surety bond request • This determination shall become part of the record for this project The Salem Planning Board approved the requested partial reduction of the surety bond for Phase IIB, with the following stipulation; The Phase IIB surety bond shall be reduced from $144,353.00 to $44,123.00, which includes a 10% roadway construction contingency in the amount of$13,123.00. If you require further information, please contact Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning&Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Charles Pulm Chair Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 975.619.5685 FAX 975.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014NOV 2S A & 35 FILE # NOTICE OF MEEWNCLERK. SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,December 4th,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • November 20th,2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 403,405 &406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for Site Plan Review, a Planned • Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit,for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lots 91,95 & 97) Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping, and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 148 Marlborough Road Applicant: Anthony M.Jermyn and Richard R.Jermyn R_ (Map 9, Lot 21) Description: Continuation of a public hearing requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law and a request for approval of an Approval Not Required plan. This notice,posted'on "01110{ gy�I • Gity Hatt Salem, Mass. n L' ZUlit JU a at d',3a i4M in accordan0e°with MGL Criap;3QA, Sections`18-25. City of Salem Planning Board. Agenda for December 4,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • Location: 60 & 64 Grove Street and 1,3, and 5 Harmony Grove Road (Map 16, Lots 237,236,377,239 and 378) Applicant: Grove Street Apartments (f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments) Description: A public hearing for an application to allow an amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. The proposed amendment includes changes to: site-related vehicle and pedestrian access (including elimination of Harmony Grove vehicle access),parking lot layout,landscaping, environmental remediation,and stormwater management. Eleven (11) parking spaces at 60 Grove Street, the commercial building,have been eliminated; the number of residential units is reduced from 141 to 129 units and one (1) additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings. IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Letter submitted to the Planning Board regarding a Final Decision of the Energy Facilities Siting Board V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyaur rghts under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 thtrou�gh 12-2033. • • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM r � �CONnIT,f 5� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Erin Schaeffer,Staff Planner DATE: November 25, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting-December 4,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda for 12/04/2014 regular meeting • ➢ Planner's Memo ➢ Legal Opinion- RCG Dodge-Area Planned Unit Development APPROVAL OF MINUTES • November 20th, 2014 Meeting Minutes REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219 &231-251 Washington Street(Map 34, Lots 0403,0405 &0406) At this time, the Planning Department has been in communication with RCG and is continuing to work on a draft decision with conditions in response to RCG's comments to our initial draft.All departmental comments received from RCG have been reviewed by the Planning Department and the Planning Department has reached out to appropriate departments for comment regarding standard conditions that RCG has requested to be clarified. A draft decision is in process with conditions and the Planning Department has been in continuous communication with RCG to move forward. At this time RCG is considering a request to continue to the next regularly scheduled meeting on December 18`h, 2014, but has not requested to do so at this time.The Planning Department is preparing a draft decision in anticipation that RCG will request a vote at the next meeting on December 4`h, 2014 The Planning Board will need to articulate findings associated with a Planned Unit Development Special Permit on December 4th, 2014 to be included in a final Planning Board decision.The City Solicitor, Beth Rennard, has provided a Legal Opinion regarding whether the Planning Board may issue a PUD Special • Permit approving two development plans. As stated,the Planning Board may issue a PUD Special Permit y.^ y` - ity of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—December 4,2014 Page 2 of 2 • approving two plans proposed by RCG in the alternative with considerations as outline by the legal opinion included in this packet. 2. 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lot 91,95&97) A draft decision is in process with conditions pertaining to all comments and recommendations from civil engineering peer review,traffic peer review, and departmental reviews. It is anticipated that the applicant will request a vote on the proposed amendments at the next planning board meeting on December 4`", 2014. 3. 60&64 Grove Street and 1,3 and 5 Harmony Grove Road (Salem Oil and Grease)(Map 16, Lots 237, 236,377,239 and 378) A draft decision is in process with conditions pertaining to all comments and recommendations from civil engineering peer review, traffic peer review, departmental review and planning board comments. It is anticipated that the applicant will request a vote on the proposed amendments at the next planning board meeting on December 4th, 2014. 4. 148 Marlborough Road-(Map P 9, Lot 21) On November 201h, the applicant requested a continuation to December 4`h.The applicant is requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law and requesting Board approval of an Approval Not Required Plan for the parcel located at 148 Marlborough Road. Fire • Prevention comments have been received by the planning board and applicant. OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS None • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board: Date am Mailing Address Phone # E-mail 6F7<6-? wb, c dill l�X�v1�2i W) I Tu 15fia.z(fit u s C�a upT. �r sm� r� �e�,��f Q ►�1 Page,_ of CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD I01U Decision FILE # CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. Amendment to Site Plan Review,Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit 1,3 & 5 Harmony Grove Road and 60&64 Grove Street (Map 16, Lots 236,237,239,377&378) December 11, 2014 Serafini,Darling&Correnti c/o Joe Correnti 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Site Plan Review,Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Amended Decision for 1,3 &5 Harmony Grove Road and 60&64 Grove Street(Grove Street Apartments)(f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments) • On Thursday November 20,2014 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 Grove Street Apartments(hereinafter referred to as the"Applicant'and/or"Owner")for an amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 1, 3 & 5 Harmony Grove Road and 60&64 Grove Street(Map 16,Lots 236,237, 239, 377& 378). The application includes changes to site-related vehicle and pedestrian access, including elimination of the Harmony Grove vehicle access; and changes to the parking lot layout, landscaping, environmental remediation,and stormwater management. Eleven (11) parking spaces at 60 Grove Street,the commercial building, have been eliminated;the number of residential units is reduced from 141 to 129 units and one(1)additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings. Specific amendments proposed are the following: 1) Elimination of the proposed vehicle bridge to and from Harmony Grove. 2) The project name is "Grove Street Apartments"formerly known as "Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments" 3) There is a proposed reduction of residential units from the previously approved 141 units to 129 units. The structure footprint and mass will not change from the previously approved plan. 4) A portion of the pedestrian path width will be increased to 14 feet. • 5) Repairs will be made to an existing pedestrian bridge for a shared-use pathway if permitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Removable bollards will be installed to prevent motor vehicle • use of the bridge. 6) 11 Parking spaces will be eliminated from the rear of the commercial building per DEP. There will be a total of 11 parking spaces available in relation to the commercial building on the site. 7) Removal of previously approved pedestrian bridge to commercial building. 8) Environmental remediation of the sludge bed located at 3 Harmony Grove Road and construction of a capped disposal cell. 9) Minor driveway, landscape, parking lot and stormwater changes. The hearing was continued to December 4, 2014 and closed on that date.The Board voted by a vote of eight(8) in favor(Charles Puleo,Dale Yale, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder, Noah Koretz, Helen Sides; Randy Clarke,and Bill Griset), and none(0)opposed to approve the proposed amendments, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Except as modified herein, Work shall conform to the Project Plans listed below entitled, "Site Plan for Mixed-Use Development: Legacy Park Apartments at Harmony Grove, 60&64 Grove Street and 3 Harmony Grove Road, Salem, MA December 2011,"prepared by Griffin Engineering Group, LLC, LeBlanc Survey Associates, Beauds Art, Inc., Sebego Technics, WLS Lighting Systems, for MRM Project Management, LLC. A. Project plans: • Sheet Title Last Revised Cover 10/16/14 N-1 Plan Notes 10/16/14 C-1 Boundary&Zoning Plan 10/16/14 C-2 Existing Conditions Plan 10/16/14 C-3 Overall Site Layout Plan 12/1/14 'C-3A Site Layout Plan 12/1/14 C-313 Site Layout Plan 12/1/14 C-3C Site Layout Plan 12/1/14 C-4A Grading,Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 10/16/14 C-413 Grading,Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 12/1/14 C-4C Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 12/1/14 C-5A Utilities Plan 10/16/14 C-513 Utilities Plan 12/1/14 C-5C Utilities Plan 12/1/14 C-6 Details I 10/16/14 C-7 Details II 10/16/14 C-8 Details II1 10/16/14 C-9 -Not used C-10 Details V Remediation Details 10/16/14 1 of I Photometric Plan 9/16/14 1 of 1 Landscape Plan 11/8/12 • 1.A1.1 Building#1 First and Second Floor Plans 6/18/12 ALL Building#2 First and Second Floor Plans 6/18/12 • ALI Building#3 First and Second Floor Plans 6/18/12 A2.1 Buildin # I Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 A2.1 Building#2 Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 A2.1 Building#3 Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 A2.2 Building#1 Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 A2.2 Building#2 Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 A2.2 Building#3 Exterior Elevations 7/2/12 2. Original Decision All conditions set forth in the original decision for Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit dated October 26,2012 shall remain and be adhered to by the applicant, unless explicitly eliminated or amended in this decision. 3. Amendments Any amendments to the approved 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 this decision shall require approval of the Planning Board. 4. 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. 5. Special Conditions a. Pedestrian Bridge 1. Conditions "D"and "E"of the original decision dated October 26, 2014, are hereby eliminated as the proposed vehicular bridge has been deleted from the amended plans. 2. The applicant shall submit a detailed design plan stamped by a Massachusetts Registered Structural Professional Engineer to the City Engineer for review and approval for the repairs to the existing North River Canal pedestrian bridge crossing for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Applicant shall seek permission from the MBTA to install or replace existing fencing along the adjacent MBTA property,to the extent permitted by the MBTA,and shall be a 4' tall, black PVC coated 1"nominal gauge chain link style. Any changes to these fencing requirements shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to a Building Permit. b. Sewage and Utilities 1. The applicant shall be responsible for evaluating the condition of existing sewer service at 60 and 64 Grove Street. The applicant shall coordinate the existing sewer service inspection with the City Engineer. The applicant shall be responsible for any repair or replacement necessary prior to the completion of the Grove Street Improvement project. If replacement is • necessary, any changes to plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to sewer service replacement.All drainage and utility upgrades necessary and proposed drainage and utility service connections in the public right of way shall be installed • prior to completion of the Grove Street Improvement project roadway paving due to the moratorium to be placed on Grove Street prohibiting new excavation after its reconstruction. 2. The Applicant shall use its best efforts to engage a waste hauler for compost that will regularly accept organic wastes from on-site residents for off-site composting. Organic wastes shall not be stored on-site in a manner that allows nuisance conditions to develop. c. Stormwater Manapement 1. The applicant to provide a completed NOI and SWPPP to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to any land disturbance. 2. The applicant to provide a completed and signed Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement to the City Engineer prior to obtaining a building permit. 3. The applicant to provide detailed design plans stamped by a Massachusetts Registered Professional Engineer for the proposed retaining walls to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. The applicant shall coordinate with the City Engineer to obtain access to the valve at Beaver Street in order to evaluate its condition. If the valve needs to be replaced,the applicant shall provide revised plans to the City Engineer for review and approval and repair and/or replace, the valve prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. The applicant to evaluate the condition and capacity of the existing drainage system within • Grove Street and demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the proposed tie-in will not adversely impact the existing system prior to the issuance of a building permit. d. Traffic 1. To ensure that proper sight lines are maintained,the Applicant shall keep vegetation clear along Grove Street and shall keep signage and other materials from impacting sight lines near the proposed driveway. 2. The end caps to the 24 space parking aisle on the western side of the site shall be defined with contrasting unit pavers or cobblestone to better define the edge of the"roadway". Revised plans to be submitted for review and approval to the City Planner prior to the Issuance of a building permit. 3. Applicant shall install removable bollards at the ends of the 14'-wide portion of the shared- use pathway in the event that unauthorized vehicular use of the pathway occurs. The applicant shall meet with the Fire Department and City Planner for review and approval prior to installation. No such bollards shall be installed without City approval. 4. The applicant agrees to donate$100,000 to the City of Salem for traffic improvements in the area in and around Harmony Grove Road, Mason Street, Grove Street, Boston Street, Bridge Street,Goodhue Street, Stafford Street, Watson Street,and Beaver Street for traffic mitigation prior to the issuance of a building permit for any of the new residential buildings shown on the Plan. • e. Affordable Housine • The Petitioner shall place an Affordable Housing Restriction on the development ensuring that at least thirteen(13)of the one hundred and twenty-nine(129)units shall be affordable. The form of the restriction is to be approved by the City Planner and recorded with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. The affordable housing restriction is to be in accordance with the eligibility criteria for the Commonwealth Department of Housing and Community Development's Subsidized Housing Inventory for.the purpose of ensuring that at least thirteen(13)dwelling units will be restricted as affordable housing for households whose annual incomes are eighty percent(801/o)or less of area median income with rents affordable to low and moderate income households, by standards established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for a period of ninety-nine(99) years from the date of the first occupancy permit. I certify that a copy of this decision and plans has been filed with the City Clerk and copies are on file with the Board. The decision shall not take effect until a copy of this decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty(20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed, and it,has been dismissed or denied,is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded on the Owners Certificate of Title if Registered Land. The owner or applicant, his successors or,assigns, shall pay the fee for recording or registering. y61. �-�/vJ Charles M. Puleo Chair • • CITY OF SALEM 06 PLANNING BOARD "1814 DEC 10 P 2: 05 NTY CLERK, SALEM, MASS, Decision Waiver from Frontage 148 Marlborough Road A Public Hearing on this petition was opened on December 4, 2014 and closed on that date with the following Board Members present: Charles Puleo,Dale Yale,Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder, Matt Veno,Noah Koretz, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, and Bill Griset. ANTHONY M.JERMYN and RICHARD R.JERMYN request a waiver from frontage requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and under MGL Chapter 41, Section 81R, to allow for the subdivision of 148 Marlborough Road into two (2) lots,with twelve (12) feet of frontage, rather than the requisite 100 feet of frontage per lot. The Planning Board voted by a vote of eight (8) in favor (Charles Puleo,Dale Yale,Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Noah Koretz, Helen Sides,Randy Clarke, and Bill Griset), and none (0) opposed to grant the waiver from frontage requirements for 148 Marlborough Road with the following conditions: • 1) All requirements of the Fire Department are to be adhered to including the following: a. Snow storage shall be located in the designated area along the North edge and rear of the driveway in accordance with the approved plan "148 Marlborough Road,Salem Massachusetts Pavement and Setbacks C-1", dated December 4, 2014, prepared by New England Civil Engineering. b. The Applicant shall install and maintain 2-foot wide,twelve (12) inch thick, compacted gravel shoulders along each edge of the driveway from the rear parcel line of front property (Lot 250B) to the end of the driveway in rear parcel (Lot 250A2) in accordance with the approved plan "148 Marlborough Road, Salem Massachusetts Pavement and Setbacks C-1", dated December 4,2014, prepared by New England Civil Engineering. c. The Applicant shall install a sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13R (Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Low-Rise Residential Occupancies) in accordance with the approved plan titled "148 Marlborough Road, Salem Massachusetts Proposed Utilities C-3", dated December 4, 2014 prepared by New England Civil Engineering; prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The Waiver from Frontage is granted for the property located at 148 Marlborough Road, as shown on the plans titled, "Subdivision Plan of Land Located at 148 Marlborough Road Salem, MA", dated • October 30, 2014, prepared by P. McCormack,PLS; "Drainage and Easement Plan Marlborough Road",August 28,2013 prepared by P. McCormack, PLS; "148 Marlborough Road, Salem 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW,SALEM.COM • Massachusetts Proposed Utilities C-3", dated December 4, 2014 prepared by New England Civil Engineering;"148 Marlborough Road,Salem Massachusetts Pavement and Setbacks C-1", dated December 4, 2014,prepared by New England Civil Engineering. 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. � "I M- �/V Charles M. Puleo, Chair The endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decisions bearing certification of the City Clerk that twenty (20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that if sucb appeal bas been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the owner of record and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The owner or applicant sball pay the fee for recording or registering. C:3 m c-) nm O S+ M 3 � N > O to • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM • PLANNING BOARD 1914 DEC 10 P 2: 05 f ILE # Form A- Decision CITY CLERK, SALEM. MASS. 148 Marlborough Road On December 4,2014, the Salem Planning Board voted by a vote of eight (8) in favor (Charles Puleo, Dale Yale,Ben Anderson,Kirt Rieder, Noah Koretz, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, and Bill Griset), and none (0) opposed to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan: "Subdivision Plan of Land Located at 148 Marlborough Road Salem,MA", dated October 30, 2014, prepared by P. McCormack, PLS. 1. Applicant: ANTHONY M.JERMYN and RICHARD R.JERMYN 2. Location: 148 Marlborough Road (Map 9,Lot 21) A Waiver of Frontage was also granted by the Planning Board on December 4, 2014 to allow twelve (12) feet of frontage on Lot 250A and Lot 250A-2 instead of the required 100 feet of frontage subject to conditions. • Sincerely, Charles M. Puleo Chair Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM 4000 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,November 20th,2014 at 7:OOpm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • November 6th,2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 148 Marlborough Road Applicant: Anthony M.Jermyn and Richard R.Jermyn Description: A public hearing requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law and a request for approval of an Approval Not Required plan. Location: 60 &64 Grove Street and 1,3, and 5 Harmony Grove Road (Map 16, Lots 237,236,377,239 and 378) Applicant: Grove Street Apartments (f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments) Description: A public hearing for an application to allow an amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. The proposed amendment includes changes to: site-related vehicle and pedestrian access (including elimination of Harmony Grove vehicle access),parking lot layout,landscaping, environmental remediation, and stormwater management. Eleven (11) parking spaces at 60 Grove Street, the commercial budding,have been eliminated; the number of residential units is reduced from 141 to 129 units and one (1) additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for Site Plan Review, a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit, for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. • City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for November 20,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion of memo regarding Bridge Street Neck zoning • MassDevelopment letter of preliminary approval to issue a revenue bond on behalf of North Shore Community Development Coalition,Inc for a project proposed on Harbor and Lafayette Streets in Salem.The proposed project does not conflict with any local or regional comprehensive plan. • Department of Environmental Protection Notice of License Application for Algonquin Gas Transmission.A copy of the notification is available to the Planning Board. • Nomination Form from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to nominate that a portion of the Point Neighborhood be designated as a Point Neighborhood Historic District. The location of the proposed Point Neighborhood Historic District is roughly bounded by Peabody Street,Congress Street, Chase Street and Lafayette Street. A copy of the nomination packet is available for circulation to the Planning Board. • 107 Highland update from site visit V. ADJOURNMENT Knawyaur rights under the Open Meeting Law M. c. 30A J 18-25 and City Ords'nance§2-2028 through J 2-2033. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 W W W.SALEM.COM j� � ovr r)avv) e C\e0.�-��_Y_ City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet � �� n �a� n1 n T3oard► tee ''` Board: � J . ;_; 3oard ofY . -� Date 1 1 / Z / 291 Name Mailing Address� Phone # E-mail a �ax � 1 �YPNv� � Sr �on �7'7� S�35i5b 1 , ,cl �t�iS�IctrMm�,IwT Qla , 5-Z _ 9,2e?Iass'si Rio i m.4vL@�o� zz 20 978 3SS��S6 Page._of rye . . a • -� CITY OF SALEM � PLANNING BOARD 1014 OCT 30 p .14 NOTICE OF MEETING ("Ty CLE'P,F SAff MRSS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,November 6, 2014 at 7.•OOpm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • October 16,2014 Meeting Minutes • October 20th,2014 Joint Public Hearing Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26,Lots 91,95 & 97) Applicant Riverview Place,LLC • Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit,as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, as well as consideration of an application for a Stormwater Management Permit, for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mined-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 4 Milk Street(Map 35, Lot 577) Applicant: 4 Milk Street Trust Description: The applicant is seeking approval from the Planning Board for an Approval Not Required Plan. Please note:This is not a public hearing. • City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for November 6,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Board discussion regarding Request for Comment/Input on FY15 Community Preservation Plan—Board comments due by November 201n • Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Central Development(B- 5)District to include the parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. Said property currently hes within the Residential Two-Family (R-2) District. • Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Residential Two-Family (R-2) District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. A portion of said property currently lies within the R-2 District and a portion of said property currently lies within the Business Wholesale and Automotive (B-4)District. • Board discussion and vote on 2015 Planning Board Meeting Schedule V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rigbtr under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 518-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 tbmugh§2-2033. • This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall. S ler, Mass. �n X `9d, d IN � ata m in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sectiofts ����gggg 25. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM Please Sign-In Salem Planning Board Meeting November 6t`, 2014 Name Mailing Address Phone Email O hu DU , as aue �l rs rI G,v P, 93 -e 1S k ?VY- 09/6c� Z2 " if-C I a2_K� 61 2-7 eQa 5`73 Qh v afoLROD by flflim4fel OA 11imD4,- Ramdb n (rJAemn II.. po 1 . 11 �2' co V4q W1 � N 1D0 '� 'LS P'W,ilia W wsenylnaer. l//Gc vim P76lG�aS'� —/�!j i ;;9 N6-7 • III �CONDIPg9 CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS f�3 7 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICD DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning and Community Development DATE: October 31, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting-November 6,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda for 11/6/2014 regular meeting • ➢ Planner's Memo ➢ Updated Landscape Architecture Plan Riverview Place ➢ Washington and Dodge- Design Consultants, Inc. Memorandum DC1 Job No. 2013-107 ➢ Washington and Dodge-Stormwater Management Permit Request Letter ➢ 4 Milk Street Form Form"A"Application-Approval Not Required Request ➢ 4 Milk Street- Zoning Board of Appeals Decision September 11th,2014 ➢ 38 Washington Street Zoning Map and Draft Ordinance ➢ 43 Bridge Street Zoning Map and Draft Ordinance ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes -October 16, 2014 ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes - October 20th, 2014 Joint City Council Meeting APPROVAL OF MINUTES • October 16th,2014 Meeting Minutes • October 201i, 2014 Joint Public Hearing Meeting Minutes REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street-"Riverview Place" Ma 26 Lots 91 95 & 97 (Map ) The applicant has submitted revised Landscape plans for the proposed connection between the City owned parking lot and Riverview Place development.The updated drawings are included in your packet. 1 have also saved the drawings,in the dropbox folder for this meeting. 2. 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219 &231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403, 0405 & 0406) • City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—October 10,2014 Page 2 of 2 The applicant will present responses to traffic peer review,trip generation sample boards for the proposed mixed-use building uses,a revised photometric plan among other updates.A Memorandum from DCI (Design Consultants, Inc.) in response to comments made by AECOM is included in the Board Packet.Additionally, RCG has requested a Stormwater Management Permit.A letter with this request is included in the Board packet. 3.4 Milk Street (Map 35, Lot 577) The applicant is seeking approval from the Planning Board for an Approval Not Required Plan.A copy of the Approval Not Required Plan is included in the Board packet. The applicant is proposing that Parcel D (379+/-square feet) will be created as a non-buildable lot and will be joined with Parcel C to create one larger contiguous lot,while squaring off the lot line between Parcel C and Lot B. On September loth, 2014 the applicant was granted a Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for minimum lot area requirements of Sec.4.1.1 Table of Dimensional Requirements of the Salem Ordinance,to allow a reduction in size of the existing nonconforming lot by approximately 379 square feet to square off the rear lot line with an abutting property.A copy of the final Zoning Board decision is included in the Board packet. OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS The Community Preservation Committee (CPC) is required to update its Community Preservation Plan annually. As part of this process,they are soliciting the Planning Board's input. A copy of the • FY14 Community Preservation Plan is in the dropbox folder from the October 16th meeting,for your review. The Board must develop a consensus and put their comments in writing no later than Thursday, November 20th. Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Central Development (B-5) District to include the parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. Said property currently lies within the Residential Two-Family(R-2) District. I have included a zoning map in the Board Packet. Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Residential Two-Family(R-2) District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. A portion of said property currently lies within the R-2 District and a portion of said property currently lies within the Business Wholesale and Automotive (B-4) District. In response to Ben Anderson's comment at the public hearing,there is no current zoning that would allow mixed-use at this location. The only zoning districts that allow mixed use are B5 (Central Development) and the North River Canal Corridor (NRCC). Neither would be appropriate for this site as it would represent"spat zoning". There was an initiative in 2012 to rezone a portion of Bridge Street Neck to allow mixed use,but the working group did not support it and it failed to move forward. We do not anticipate moving forward again with this initiative in the immediate future. Reinvestment in Bridge Street Neck represented by the proposed project could be a catalyst for other investment. Bridge Street Neck is a mix of residential and commercial and small single family homes would be complementary to this mix. Board discussion and vote on 2015 Planning Board Meeting Schedule (To be e-mailed before Nov 6th) CITY OF SALEM r PLANNING BOARD PITY CLERKLSALEM, MASS Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of ANTHONY M. JERMYN and RICHARD R. JERMYN requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law located at 148 MARLBOROUGH RD (Map 9, Lot 12) (RI Zoning District). The public hearing will be held on Thurs,November 20`h, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St., 3`d floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`d Floor, 120 Washington St., • Salem, MA. Salem News: November 6th and 13th, 2014 Know Your Bights under the Open Meeting Lain MG.L c. 30A 18-25 and City Ordinance 2-2028 through 2-2033. T This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, in accordancass. on eVAth MGO at ' '` L Chap. 30A, h"� W Sections J8-25.. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404- WWW.SALEM.COM THE FOLLOWING IS/ARE THE BEST IMAGES FROM POOR QUALITY ORIGINALS) I M /A-�C&.7 DATA P1enn, of Salem ff . g Board t Persons Interestediilnh[henappllcelj+ OF SALEM tion of ANTHONY M.JERMYN and " RICHARD R.JERMYN re ' waiver of fren g questing a the 9ubdivlslonaC mro��want adY'NNING BOARD 1421MR R2oL13NngODhstncRD(Map 9. e. L ie Public hearing will be held on -. t 1814 OCT 30 p 6 3 3 1 rs, ovember 20th,2014 at 7.00 -_ ....t PM,at 120 WashingtanSt 3rd Noor, mr Oi In ecco dance wnn chap- FILE # ter qOq of the Ch (ien- CITY ��e d Fla are PY of.the application y GLERt<, SALEM. MASS, [Or review on Nle and available ESOurs at the^De normal business ommun PI. of,Planning g.. ., �20 Wash�gton St door Public Hearing Notice ' Chart Pulito t" Chair, N 11/611/13/14 [ City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of ANTHONY M. JERMYN and RICHARD R. JERMYN requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law located at 148 MARLBOROUGH RD (Map 9, Lot 12) The public hearing will be held on Thurs, November 20th, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St., 3`d floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`d Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem,MA. Salem News: November 6th and 13th, 2014 Know Your Rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. a 30A if 18-25 and City Ordinance 12-2028 through 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hae, Salem, Mass.on OCT 3 0 2014 at &-'b?PM in accordance with MGL Chap.30A, Sections 18-25. . • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404- www.sALEM.WM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1114 NOV 12 A ID 31 CITY CLERKSALEJ1, MASS, Form A — Decision 4 Milk Street On October 6, 2014 by a unanimous vote of seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puelo, Mr. Anderson, Mr.Veno, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Koretz, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset)and none (0) opposed to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required"for the property located at 4 Milk Street and filed on the following described plan: "4 Milk Street Trust' dated June 25, 2014, revised July 20`h, 2014. 1. Applicant: William L' Heureux, c/o 4 Milk Street Trust, 14 Pickman Street, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: Map 35, Lot 577 4 Milk Street,Salem, MA 01970 3. Description:The applicant requests to create a non-buildable lot, Parcel D(379+/-square feet),to be joined with Parcel C to create one larger contiguous lot, while squaring off the lot line between • Parcel C and Lot B. Deed of property records in Essex South District Registry. Sincerely, q Charles Puleo Chair Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM r PLANNING BOARD 1014 NOV 10 P 12: 31 FILE Y Report to City Council PITY CLERK, SALEM, MACS, November 7, 2014 At its meeting on November 6, 2014 the Planning Board voted with six (6) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Koretz, Ms. Sides, and Mr.Griset), none(0) opposed, and one (1) abstention(Mr. Reider)to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Salem by extending the Central Development(B-5) District to include the entire parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. The complete version of the proposed amendment, as recommended for approval by the Planning Board, is below: City ofSarem • In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section L That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the following described area of real property located at 38 Washington Square South as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 35, Parcel 0425, from R-2 Residential Two-Family District to B-5 Central Development District by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include this parcel. Section IL This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. 0 r =� CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 NOV 1 n n 12 , Report to City Council CITY CLERK, SALEft November 7, 2014 At its meeting on November 6, 2014 the Planning Board voted with six (6) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Koretz, Ms. Sides, and Mr.Griset), none (0) opposed, and one (1) abstention(Mr. Reider), to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Salem by extending the Residential Two- Family (R-2)District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. The complete version of the proposed amendment, as recommended for approval by the Planning Board is below: City of Safem In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, asfollows: Section L That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the portion of the parcel of real property located at 43 Bridge Street as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 36, Parcel 0238, from B-4 Business Wholesale and Automotive to R-2 Residential Two-Family District by extending the R-2 Residential Two-Family District to include the entire parcel. Section IL This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 NOV -b A 21 S Public Hearing Notice CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of Grove Street Apartments (f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments) for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 60 & 64 Grove Street and 1, 3, and 5 Harmony Grove Road(Map 16, Lots 237, 236, 377, 239 and 378). Specifically, the application includes changes to site-related vehicle and pedestrian access, including elimination of the Harmony Grove vehicle access; and changes to the parking lot layout, landscaping, environmental remediation, and stormwater management. Eleven (11) parking spaces at 60 Grove Street, the commercial building, have been eliminated; the number of residential units is • reduced from 141 to 129 units and one (1) additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings. The public hearing will be held on Thurs,November 20`h, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St., 3`d floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`d Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Salem News: November 6th and 13th, 2014 Know Your Rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A 9 18-25 and City Ordinance g 2-2028 through 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official B Iletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on NOV � 6 1014 at %.'Z&10-1in accordance with MGL Chap. 3 Sections 18-25. P OA, • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404- WWW.SALEM.COM , CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ,,,,. esr �� ,ail= 30 FILE 4,. CITY CLERK, SALEM. MAS, Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of Grove Street Apartments (f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments) for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 60 & 64 Grove Street and 1, 3, and 5 Harmony Grove Road (Map 16, Lots 237, 236, 377, 239 and 378). Specifically, the application includes changes to site-related vehicle and pedestrian access, including elimination of the Harmony Grove vehicle access; and changes to the parking lot layout, landscaping, environmental remediation, and stormwater management. Eleven(11)parking spaces at 60 Grove Street, the commercial building, have been eliminated; the number of residential units is • reduced from 141 to 129 units and one (1) additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings. The public hearing will be held on Thurs,November 6`", 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St., 3`d floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`a Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Salem News: October 23`d and 30th, 2014 Knorr Yaur Aightr under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L a 30A g 18-25 and City Ordinance f 2-2028 through 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Nall, Salem, Mass. on OCT 10 2014 at r/.`36 ,4H in accordance wi MGL Chap, 30A, Sections 18-25. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404- WWW.SALEM.COM City of Saieri Planning Board Mr,eting Minutes—November 6,2014 Pigc 9 of 33 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday, November 6,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:11 pm. i, fr ¢ Et.ft i ad d in r 8 it si i t v ti RolfCall Ytt, rya. Yt.p�, .. tNlt WhS u "s t I$dc fir:' } vtt„ ,i F t 4 i' i..; . - la tµ.owt .�ta. ,..,xu :,� mL�''e. .�w.4t& Rv,,:>x9a.� ,.,._., Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Vice Chair, Kirt Rieder, Helen Sides, Bill Griset, Matthew Veno and Noah Koretz. Absent: Dale Yale and Randy Clarke. Also present: Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. ,r.wa.aava - r+ � 277771 �' " t€ n„x,aauuyuvaa+auw»aruCyt1g,n �qpq i n7�'Approof Minutes , � U_ R' I 9a e�4:x.;•e''.I,xsFr�Gwa October 16,2014 Regular Meeting Minutes October 20,2014 Joint Public Hearing with City Council Minutes Minor corrections were made by the Planning Board members to the October 16, 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes. Motion and Vote: Matthew Veno made a motion to approve the October 16, 2014 revised Regular Meeting Minutes, seconded by Kirt Reider. The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor and none (0) opposed. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the October 20, 2014 Joint Public Heating with City Council Minutes, seconded by Noah Koretz. The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor and none (0) opposed. p`"'"•""Xr'"`""7^ 'P*�.?I*" PlRtit?f htt{hti�t3 t+t@$�i3rii+ triMNMtP t xewvwrc.^^+w*..;a t wwwix " n� f.rs f tayeR� y, t tt . , t9h : City of Salern--Pla:inin.a Board Meeting Minutes—November 6, 2014 rage 2 of 1.:3 Board Discussion: The Board asked what precipitated the request between neighbors. Atty Correnti advised the owner of lot A wants to buy lot B and both parties want a straight lot line. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to endorse the Approval Not Required request os submitted, seconded by Kirt Reider. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none (0)opposed. .,azMU vi ..,. tw �fiw u� v�NExsai�� :'iL ? ym , 9? P"d .,. ido- Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET(Map 26, Lots 91,95 &97) Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision, North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit.Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping,and parking, primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch.91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. • Documents and Exhibitions: Riverview Place Site Plans, revised June September 14, 2014 Riverview Place Landscape Plan, revised September 23, 2014 Comparative Drainage Analysis Riverview Place, revised September 21, 2014 Riverview Place Parking Connection Plan SK-1, dated October 24, 2014 Stormwater Report for Riverview Place, dated September 21, 2014 Atty Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover& Frey, 27 Congress Street, presented for the applicant. Additional speakers included: • Richard Williams MSCE, P.E.; Williams&Sparages, 189 North Main Street Suite 101, Middleton, MA (civil engineering) • James Emmanuel;James K. Emmanuel Associates, 22 Carlton Road, Marblehead, MA (landscape architecture) • Stephen Feinstein; Director of Finance, Symes Associates, 50 Dodge Street, Beverly, MA(primary developer) • William Ross P.E.; Principal Engineer, New England Civil Engineering Corp., 120 Washington Street (civil engineering peer reviewer) Atty Grover provided an overview on the status of the project. The applicant has revised the pedestrian connection to the City-owned parking lot. The City requires a "right of entry" agreement be executed by the proponent to work on the City-owned lot; which the proponent is prepared to execute. The City has deferred to the Planning Board to define and approve the actual work to be done on the City property. . Regarding the Essex Sewer District right-of-way easement, the City Solicitor contacted the Sewer District attorney. Sewer District is concerned that the proposed pin oak tree roots might interfere, so the City of Sale.rn—Planning Board Meeting ,Minute-_s--November 6, 2014 Page 3 of 33 • proponent has removed these from the plan and will replace with shrubs. Still pending is approval from the Design Review Board (DRB) with regard to compliance of the North River Canal Corridor overlay district requirements. The applicant is scheduled to appear before the DRB on December 3rd and will present with 3D model. They expect to make a final appearance before the Planning Board in December and receive a decision at that meeting. Mr. Emmanuel continued the presentation and described changes to the landscape plan. The walkways have been aligned to provide a connection from the Mason Street side of the property to the walkway along the North River Canal. The proposal has been updated to maintain the pines along the boundary with the City property; the pin oaks have been eliminated due to Southern Essex Sewer District (SESD) concerns. The connector path to the existing parking lot path is a more direct route. All scrub brush will be cleaned up on the City property. • In response to a Board inquiry, Atty Grover clarified that the Essex easement is 25-feet wide. The SESD communication indicated a 35-foot parameter to preclude plantings. The Board noted the SESD is establishing a buffer zone on property that is not their property; it is important their request not be interpreted as an extension of the formal easement. The Board pointed out large trees currently exist along the edge of the easement. The proponent is prepared to clean up the scrub brush on the easement and will plant only shrubs adjacent the easement. o Mr. Feinstein offered that the applicant is crossing the SESD easement with paving and willing to accommodate their request with regard to tree placement. • Mr. Emmanuel continued with a detailed review of the different types of proposed fencing, as illustrated on the updated Landscape Plan. Along the southern boundary, Flint Street and the City parking lot they are planning ornamental fencing, black aluminum. o The Board expressed a concern about quality issues with aluminum fencing, paint can flake pretty fast and the fence may take a bit of abuse given the location. The Board asked to know the manufacturer's guarantee on the finish as early deterioration is a significant concern. o Mr. Emmanuel noted plantings are planned for either side of this portion of the fence which will provide some protection from snow removal equipment. o After discussion of various options for fencing material, the Board agreed with Mr. Emmanuel that the need for an upscale appearance is critical and plantings will offer some protection for the proposed fencing. • Fencing around the dumpster station will be wooden stockade with concrete filled bolsters on the inside. Stockade fence may be stained, with swing gates and post. • Ornamental fence (black aluminum) will be adjacent the wall on the north side of the property. o Board asked if the abutters on north side of the property have fences on the boundary; noting there is a grade difference along this property line. Mr. Emmanuel clarified the edge is a slope not a drop-off. • The Black chain-link fencing will be pvc-dipped. Mr. Williams led a brief discussion regarding lighting and distributed spec sheets to Board members for parking area lighting and campus-style lighting. He reviewed placement; colonial fixtures will have Arcadian base and classic finial (chosen from spec sheet options). • • 5 mongoose-style lights are in parking lot, 4 of these at 18-degree angle to face away from residences and onto parking lot.These will be silver. City of Salem–Plarming Boa,d Meeting Minutes--November 6, 201.4 Page 4 of 13 • • Colonial lights along driveway and adjacent to the building. • Overspill onto abutting properties is less than 0.5 foot-candles, generally at 0.1 or 0.2. Board requested that staff determine whether City code allows any overspill or if proponent must be required to select lighting that prohibits any spillover. Mr. Williams advised most towns use 0.5 footcandles at the property line. • Board asked that the site plan to specify colors and trim for lighting fixtures. Mr. Ross of NECE, peer reviewer civil engineering, continued the presentation. He reminded the Board this is the fourth review of this project, dating back to 2009. Storm water standards have now been met. Conditions from 2009 review that are still relevant are listed here. The formal letter has just been sent to the applicant so they have not had time to formally respond: • Drainage from Mason Street has a condition—must locate the drainpipe, reroute through the site, keep the dedicated City drain and give the city easement for access; prior to approval for foundation permit. • Cut and cap gas lines entering the site; must be reviewed before demolition permit. • Need details for storm water and oil/water separators and roof water drainage. As architectural plans are not done, applicant must come back to Planning Board and City staff with final drawings. • Valves on Mason Street, need 2 or 3 valves; applicant will be meeting with city engineer. • Bio-retention cell comment still stands, needs to review in relation to the updated landscape plan. • • SESD request for a buffer is to keep tree roots out of the easement. • During high tide the river could backflow into the bio-retention cell; need to add a check valve to prevent this. Mr. Ross continued with a list of new comments: • At the time of previous reviews, storm water management permit was not required. A permit application now needs to be filed. o Atty Grover advised the proponent has filed this application. • Flood hazard district special permit is now required. All utilities must be above the flood plain and there must be access for movement of emergency vehicles and people during flood events. Parking within the floodplain is an issue. • Sewer infrastructure new comments; pipe on the site is in poor condition; needs replacement. Flint Street pipe connection can be rehabilitated; it must be done with the city engineer. • Five sewer manholes on the site need to be removed. • City engineering is concerned about the sidewalks on Mason Street. City could not complete new sidewalk portion adjacent the property due to dropoff. City requests the proponent complete this section of the sidewalk. Chair Puleo opened the meeting to public comment. • Jane Arlander 93 Federal Street; during July 17th Planning Board meeting, Barbara Warren voiced concern that during a flood event water would go into the SESD from the flooded garage. This clogs the sewer pipes throughout the city. Is there any solution to this situation? o Mr. Williams responded that the requirement is to provide drainage from the garage • into the sewer system.The proponent will install valves to prevent storm water from entering the garage; in this case flood water would recede back into the river. During a flood event, garage could be flooded if the valve is closed to prevent drainage into the City of Salem—Planning Board Nieetng tvlinutes--November 6, 201 Page S of 1:3 • sewer system and use of the garage would be dependent on flood water receding into the river. o Atty Grover reminded the Board that this project provides 2 parking spaces per residential unit, as compared to the requirement of 1.5 spaces per unit. o Board asked how much of the site will be covered in a flood event? Mr.Williams advised the upper deck and spaces nearest Mason Street would be available. Spaces likely flooded would be in the garage and those spaces those closest to the river— approximately 50%depending on the flood level. • Meg Twohey 122 Federal Street; please do not permit outside dumpsters on this site and in this neighborhood. At the time of permitting she understood all trash was to be under cover in the building and available to residents by key.There is a real concern with rats in this neighborhood given the river location. Other projects on the North River have required the dumpsters be located inside a building. o Atty. Grover advised the location of the dumpster has not been moved from 2009 approvals. Chair Puleo clarified there will be 2 dumpsters (1 recycle and 1 pickup). Mr. Williams advised each dumpster will hold eight yards of material. Mr. Williams explained the dumpster location is 8-10 vertical feet downhill from Mason Street and concealed with a stockade fence. Dumpster station not visible from Mason or Flint Street. It will be visible from the river and Bridge Street but is screened by vegetation and distance. Putting the dumpsters in the garage will not discourage rats as the garage is open. The • clearance of the garage will prohibit garbage trucks from accessing any dumpsters located there. o Board asked if there will be a full-time maintenance attendant at this property as the rat concern seems to be a maintenance issue. Mr. Feinstein advised they will likely staff with a part-time worker,and confirmed residents will be responsible for placing their refuse in the dumpsters. • David Zion, represents the landowner at 72 Flint Street; in response to Mr. Ross' peer review report, advised the demolition permit precluded them from penetrating through the slabs on the property.Atty Grover clarified the Conservation Commission required the slabs stay intact. Chair Puleo summarized next steps for this project to obtain a Planning Board decision: • A few new items need engineering peer review • DRB on December 3rd • Atty Grover would like to continue to the Planning Board meeting scheduled for December 4`h If favorable meeting with the DRB on December 3rd, the proponent would hope to have a decision from the Planning Board on December 4th. Motion and Vote: Bill Griset made a motion to continue to December 4, 2014,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none (0)opposed. 115" : Yi �rePtl Y �R6t�P*n rPkE+ mer , ,? 2a .21 §ds Location: 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405 &0406) City of Salem—Planning board Meeting Minutes--%overnber 5, 2014. Page 6 of _3 • Applicant: Dodge Area, LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review, a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit and a Stormwater Management Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Documents and Exhibitions: • Salem Gateway: Washington and Dodge St Infrastructure Improvements Salem MA— Stormwater Management Report; revised Nov 4, 2014(DCI Project No 2013-107) • Salem Gateway: Washington and Dodge St Infrastructure Improvements Salem MA-- Proposed Site Plan, Project 2013-107, Sheet C3.0 dated Nov 4, 2014 • Salem Gateway: Washington and Dodge St Infrastructure Improvements Salem MA-- Proposed Utilities Plan, Project 2013-107, Sheet C 4.0 dated Nov 4, 2014 • DCI Memorandum Response to peer Review Comments dated Oct 10, 2014 • DCI Peer Review Letter dated Oct 21, 2014 and revised Nov 4, 2014 • Email dated November 4, 2014 from Dennis Flynn (AECOM peer reviewer) to staff planner Erin Schaeffer; summary of outstanding traffic peer review issues. • Washington at Dodge Development Proposal Presentation to Salem Planning Board, dated Nov 6, 2014 • Matthew Picarsic, Managing Principal for RCG, LLC (developer) presented for the applicant. Additional speakers included: • Dennis Flynn, P.E., PTOE; AECOM Transportation, 250 Apollo Drive, Chelmsford MA; peer reviewer. • David Giangrande, PE; Design Consultants Inc., 68 Pleasant Street, Newburyport, MA • Tom Bertulis PE, PTOE; Design Consultants Inc., 68 Pleasant Street, Newburyport, MA • Wayne Keefner, PE, LEED,AP, BD+C; Principal, Design Consultants Inc., 68 Pleasant Street, Newburyport, MA • William Ross, PE, Principal Engineer, New England Civil Engineering Corp., 120 Washington Street; peer reviewer. • Jonathan Ofilos;Tinti, Quinn, Grover& Frey, PC, 27 Congress Street Mr. Picarsic provided an overview of the issues covered: • Traffic, roadways and on-street parking including peer review by AECOM • Utilities and storm water management • Program flexibility request updated • Housekeeping items(updated photometrics and building exterior materials) TRAFFIC, ROADWAYS&ONSTREET As a result of the peer review, a couple of changes: • Right turn from Washington Street westbound into the upper parking court removed, keeping • on-street parking spaces. • Remove dedicated westbound left-turn lane onto Canal due to low volume; wider island provides better pedestrian refuge. Cily of Sa&22m—Planning Board i,Aceting Minutes—Novernher 6, 2014 • • Additional width permitting wider shoulder or bike lane along Washington Street. • Discovered more width for Washington Street on west side of project providing for parallel parking and bicycle lane plus two 12-ft travel lanes for northbound Washington Street. • Added a HAWK signal for pedestrian crossing at Wash crossing at Dodge. Committed to a pedestrian-activated beacon. • Spaces on Washington Street will be metered. Mr. Picarsic advised the peer reviewer and proponent have reached agreement on most issues. Mr. Flynn of AECOM (traffic peer reviewer) summarized final technical peer review requests related to signage and crosswalks as itemized in the email dated Nov 4, 2014. • Board asked if AECOM foresees traffic backup due to the new pedestrian-activated crossing over Washington Street (at Dodge Street Court). Mr. Flynn advised the rapid-flash (strobe) beacon will alert motorists of a pedestrian in their lane, but not require the motorist to wait out a red/green/yellow cycle for full crossing. • Board discussed at length the types of pedestrian crossing signals under consideration,their impact on traffic backup and concern for pedestrian safety as vehicles approach the northbound left turn from Washington Street onto Norman Street.The discussion included the relationship of the existing pedestrian crossing at the south end of Washington Street(Canal Street) in relation to the proposed new crossing at Dodge Street Court. • Proponent's consultants and AECOM are still considering the best solution for this crossing.The City will be improving the intersection at Washington and Canal including adjusting light timing • to provide pedestrians with adequate crossing time. • Board confirmed with Mr. Flynn there is nothing to preclude the developer from using an upgrade of the city standard of UTILITIES AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Mr. Picarsic advised there are two items under investigation: • Where is the South River conduit under Washington Street; this is important as it will determine the width available to lay out new utilities. • Determine whether or not the 42" sewer line where Washington Street curves is in fact abandoned. If not, design will need to be updated to address the flow. Mr. Giangrande advised they have videoed as much as possible but there are sections that cannot be penetrated; some manholes are filled with debris.They have a reasonable understanding of the location of the South River conduit, but have agreed with the City to cut holes in the streets in an attempt to fine-tune the location of these items so the utilities can be finalized. Mr. Ross (peer reviewer) advised the most recent consultation was this morning;formal report to come. • Stormwater management plan revised; Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and Stormwater Management Report to be submitted before foundation permit. • Utility relocation is the main issue. The existing parking lot(purchased from the City) is the nexus of several critical utilities including three 42" sewer lines.The targeted relocation zone has the South River 5-curving through it. Have reached agreement with the city engineer on a concept plan of relocation. Final plan will be determined by the location of the South River • conduit and the disposition of the 42-inch sewer lines. • Clay pipe along Dodge Street Court will be replaced with other lines on this street. City of Salem_.Planning Scird Meeting Minutes--(November 6, 2014 Page u of 3.:3 • • Comments on the utility design will be revised once civil and architectural designs are further along. • Several technical issues remain to be reviewed by the City Engineer to determine whether the conceptual plan can actually be built. • Sewer flow rates have been provided; no concerns based on expected peak use. • This project falls within flood zone so flood overlay restrictions apply. Emergency vehicles must have access and occupants able to leave via an un-flooded area. Floor of the hotel has been raised above the floodplain. • Area of disagreement regarding how to handle pre/post flows for storm water management. There is a tide gate that enables the South River to be treated as non-tidal. Plans being revised to take this into account. Resubmission prior to foundation permit is recommended. • Infiltration unit under patio needs to be designed and approved prior to foundation permit. • City engineer needs details on how and where this project will tie into City water system. • Run-off management plan needed and it must sync with stormwater management plan and civil plans, before foundation permit. PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY Mr. Picarsic reviewed with the Board the proponent's request for approval to include program flexibility for a variety of uses. Five examples were previously provided at the September 4`" meeting. The proponent has simplified the programming options to focus on options A and C; • Base program with 111 hotel rooms, 84 residential units and 20,000 (+/- 14,000)square feet of • commercial space; overall floor area of+/- 190,000 square feet, 253 parking spaces. • Conversion of hotel rooms to retail and/or residential, 145 residential units, 28,000(+/-22,000) commercial space; overall square floor area parking and building heights to remain the same. The proponent requests project approval with the ability to convert to hotel to residential/retail without returning to the Planning Board.The proponent regards this as an insignificant change and presented data to support: • Traffic—trip count is reduced with more residential use, • Parking—current allocation would accommodate residential use, • Water/Sewer loads—slightly higher for water flow and sewer flow if converted to residential, but same service size requirements and sufficient service at the street to accommodate. REVISED LIGHTING PLAN &BUILDING EXTERIOR MATERIALS Mr. Picarsic advised the lighting plan has been updated to address the lighting near 257 Washington Street, resulting in a reduction of footcandles to minimize light spillover. Proposed lights have been relocated and changed to provide 0.5 footcandles or less. Fixtures are type SA-1. Regarding the Planning Board request to view exterior materials,they have been made available to the DRB and approved with some conditions. Presentation boards on display in the meeting room tonight for the Planning Board to review at their leisure. Mr. Picarsic concluded the presentation with a request to close the public hearing tonight, and move forward with the preparation of a draft decision. • Chair Puleo opened the meeting to public comment. Cih,; 0�S'alPm —Planning Board NeetingMinutes—Novi nberC,, 2014 Pane g of 13 • • William Legault, City Councillor-at-Large, 2 Orne Street; offered clarification regarding the proposed new crosswalk over Washington Street (at Dodge Street Court). He firmly confirmed the desire path at this location exists because it is the safest place to cross Washington Street, based on his personal experience as a daily pedestrian in the area. He is in favor of the plan to formalize this crosswalk. Additional Board Discussion: Chair Puleo recommended if the Board is going to entertain such broad program flexibility,the public hearing should remain open for a bit longer. o Mr. Picarsic offered the proponent would be amenable to approval of the base programming, with stated willingness to consider programming change subject to technical review of changes and impacts. Mr. Anderson expressed concern regarding three issues: o Proposed new crosswalk (at Washington & Dodge Court) and potential vehicular backup as a result. No traffic engineering data was presented on this matter. o Program flexibility requested is very broad. If proponent cannot build what is approved, they should be required to present a new program for Board approval. o Concerned about shortage of parking and losing any on-street parking—but doesn't see an easy resolution. Parking loss will negatively impact the neighborhood. o The Board agreed that the loss of Pond Street parking is not the proponent's issue; and the City has sold the Washington Street east lot which is now private • property. Mr. Kortez indicated a preference the Board limit approval to a specific program use plan; and encouraged the applicant to return to present their alternative if the hotel use cannot be finalized. Chair Puleo indicated there is another round of peer review on utilities and engineering matters. Mr. Ross advised the Board could condition an approval with a set of requirements to be met and approved by the City Engineer. Chair Puleo and Mr. Ross both observed the discovery process for the civil engineering issues could take months and a carefully conditioned approval may be the best way to move forward. Mr. Flynn (AECOM peer review firm) responded to the concern regarding vehicle backup at the crosswalk.To give a formal answer the peer reviewer would need to link traffic flow study with projected pedestrian volume which has not been done. The desire path has been attested to by several observers and the crosswalk is recommended by AECOM. Additional Board Discussion of Proposed Crosswalk at Washington Street/Dodge Court: • Ms. Sides observed we are introducing a very different type of signal in the middle of a block instead of at an intersection. She believes the presence of the crosswalk will increase pedestrian traffic and add to vehicular backups. Perhaps the improvement to the crosswalk at Washington and Canal Streets will encourage people to feel safer at this crossing. • Mr. Picarsic pointed out the consultants are trying to balance interests here between . pedestrians and vehicles. The solution is not ideal for either but represents a compromise to accommodate both. City of 5alern.—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—November 6, 2014 Page 10 of 13 • • Mr. Anderson suggested tying the new crosswalk signal to match the signal at Washington and New Derby streets pedestrian crossing. Mr.Veno agreed, adding that the short left-turn light from Washington Street northbound onto Norman Street could create a dangerous situation. Vehicles queuing to make this turn will back up into the crosswalk. o Mr. Giangrande advised the flash beacon cannot be linked to a traffic signal at this time. • Chair Puleo asked Mr. Flynn (AECOM peer reviewer) if they will crosshatch "don't block the box' at the intersection of Canal and Washington Streets. Mr. Flynn responded it is not currently proposed. Chair Puleo asked if this treatment is helpful in controlling traffic. Mr. Flynn advised it was not proposed for the Canal/Washington intersection as the traffic backup does not warrant it at present. • The Board discussion continued, including the possibility of abandoning the proposed new crosswalk in favor of the existing crosswalk at Washington/Canal. The Board reached consensus that both crosswalks are needed and City Departments will need to monitor the new traffic patterns and make adjustments once the project and street improvements are completed. Concluding Board Discussion: Chair Puleo directed planning staff to check with City Planner Lynn Duncan about approving the flexible program use. Mr. Ofilos indicated the proponent's attorneys believe the Planning Board has the authority under statutory framework to decide in favor of the flexible programming request. Counsel has met with Lynn Duncan and Beth Rennard (City Solicitor) who are reviewing the matter. • Chair Puleo specifically asked Planning Board members for their input on the request to close the public hearing.The Board consensus was to keep the public hearing open, noting that two members were not in attendance and closing the hearing would not result in significant time savings to the applicant. The Board further agreed to delay work on a draft decision until hearing from the City Planner and City Solicitor on the flexible program issue.Staff planner Erin Schaeffer was asked to follow-up. Mr. Picarsic reminded the Board there will be no change to buildings,just program use. Motion and Vote: Kirt Reider made a motion to continue the public hearing to November 20, 2014, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz) and none(0)opposed. t €an nn p.mx�mrxtxsw,m. qw y nr "fir F y. oS�tl1 B n♦Cri"` c9x5� Cis, rm`�°r G u , eF att �;- , e °�o-" DId�NeW BUSInesS { e e ac vg r. e E u�iw.f,Ui 3, 1T s � ,n- fn-.::,.,ru_�,�... '4�o•,u,uca..ss:rEir;f ,4 • Board discussion regarding Request for Comment/Input on FY15 Community Preservation Plan— Board comments due by November 20th Board Discussion: Collectively,the Board made three general recommendations: o CPA not fund anything directly related to parking or vehicular activities. o Look for projects focused on preserving and highlighting our maritime heritage. o Local neighborhood parks need help with upkeep; this is a great use of CPA funds. W, 11,22 vr} ate', ww x. it h t '�ih`{Y le ^R>'W YYf J D 1 r'� :� ,,� + : 5Na G L:e.°�« ,*- wuva,..�s. 'u3,6a,....,..e,.:: d«: „ City of 5alern--Planning Board Meeti -,g Minutes—November 6. 2014 Page I.A. of 13 • • Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Central Development (B-5) District to include the parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. Said property currently lies within the Residential Two- Family(R-2) District. Chair Puleo read the draft ordinance into the record for the benefit of Planning Board members and the public in attendance.The Board quickly reached consensus the ordinance is in the City's best interests and observed there was no unfavorable public comment received during or after the joint hearing with City Council. City of Salem In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section 1. That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the following described area of real • property located at 38 Washington Square South as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 35, Parcel 0425, from R-2 Residential Two-Family District to B-5 Central Development District by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include this parcel. Section 11. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. Motion and Vote: Matthew Veno made a motion to endorse the draft amendment and recommend adoption by the City Council, seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none (0) opposed, with one abstention (Mr. Reider). 6 %F P t i� »qyy,. ;$ d Ertl� Ii3iW .:4edM.n. '�..�1���� .,, ^n. =��,w..IIL,�L�yea�L°�aN�N���.osi�t� '�,n�.Q�N� .vm7=;i, �u��.-�:+� -id • Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Councilregardingthe proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Residential Two-Family(R-2) District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. A portion of said property currently lies within the R-2 District and a portion of said property currently lies within the Business Wholesale and Automotive (B-4) District. Chair Puleo suggested the Board review the zoning map of the neighborhood.The Board identified a primary point of concern: The Board is concerned the development of the lot provide frontage on the Bridge Street portion that is in character with the rest of the street. Representative discussion points included: • Citgo of Sa!ern--Planning Board tv eetirEg Ytinufes—Rovemter 6,2012 Page 12 of 13 • • The problem is the portion of the lot facing Bridge Street.To front this lot on Planters Street could create a "blank wall"facing an entrance corridor street. The Board discussed treatment examples in other neighborhoods that could address this potential corner lot. • The primary uses on the same side of Bridge St are B2 and B4. Some Board members believe a decision to rezone to accommodate this project(and get the lot cleaned up) could be short- sighted and not in the best interests of the neighborhood. • It is unfortunate there is no comprehensive plan for the Bridge Street corridor to provide guidance. After discussion,the Board agreed to recommend adoption of the draft amendment, said recommendation to include a cover letter to City Council to relay additional suggestions: • The requested ordinance highlights the need for appropriate zoning reform to address this request and develop a comprehensive plan for the Bridge Street Entrance Corridor.The Planning Board respectfully urges the City Council to request a planning study for the Bridge Street Corridor. • Encourage the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider treatment of any lot created that abuts Bridge street be approved in keeping with the character of Bridge Street with no setback along the Bridge Street frontage. City of Salem • In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section 1. That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the portion of the parcel of real property located at 43 Bridge Street as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 36, Parcel 0238, from B-4 Business Wholesale and Automotive to R-2 Residential Two-Family District by extending the R-2 Residential Two-Family District to include the entire parcel. Section 11. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. Motion and Vote: Matthew Veno made a motion to endorse the draft amendment and recommend adoption by the City Council, said draft amendment to be accompanied by formal letter to City Council expressing additional recommendations: 1) the need for comprehensive zoning reform with regard to the Bridge Street Corridor, and 2)strongly recommend the Zoning Board of Appeals consider treatment of any lot created that abuts Bridge street be approved in keeping with the character of Bridge Street with no setback along the Bridge Street frontage;seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz) and none (0)opposed, with one abstention (Mr. Reiderl. pp • ,E� i,x ay'i�iva g ..,.4:"V�'!h"�l !�di �'E�F,AP,mve� L* i"ts-'E�+i. d E', §�R " y;x ,112 et l E� HE oaxn,o ssb�...Ar.4(»a..Fclw,4:�w.W,..3s,ae e .iuro:s Uy of Saieni—Panning Board NIPCtif7b h4inn€es—November 6,2014 Page 13 of 13 • • Board Discussion and vote on 2015 Planning Board Meeting Schedule. Ms. Schaeffer distributed a draft and advised it is currently posted on the city website.The dates still need to be double-checked against City Council and other key schedules. Matthew Veno made a motion to approve the schedule as drafted, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz) and none (0)opposed. i �u 5"m i s� a r i i tir Adjournment a ., Kr _ Sa3u3 ' tri wd sum a: a i . -" w 'dam 6.' w a&i ,d 3 Motion and Vote: Matthew Veno made a motion to adiourn the meeting,seconded by Bill Griset. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 11:OOpm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 11/20/2014 Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law MG.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City Ordinance§2-2028 through§2-2033. • CITY OF SALEM ,r PLANNING BOARD o rl. C2 NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council sill be holding a Joint Public Hearing on Monday, October 20, 2014 at 7:00pm at N City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington Street . o Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. REGULAR AGENDA • A joint public hearing with the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Central Development (B-5) District to include the parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. Said property currently lies within the Residential Two-Family (R-2) District. • • A joint public hearing with the City Council regarding the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Residential Two-Family (R-2) District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. A portion of said property currently lies within the R-2 District and a portion of said property currently lies within the Business Wholesale and Automotive (B-4) District. III. ADJOURNMENT Knamyaur rghts under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L a 30A J 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through J 2-2033. This notice i)ostecl fin "Official Bulletin Board" COV Nail. .,aletr_ P,':nftS. On cIrlfio20/�K at ,j.W"7 in cordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 SEP 30 P 2-' 52 FE PITY CLEB SALEM, MASS. City of Salem Notice Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and City Council October 20, 2014, 7:00 P.M. The Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing pursuant to MGL c.40A s.5 with the City Council on Monday, October 20, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 93 Washington St, Salem, MA for all persons interested in the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Central Development (B-5) District to include the parcel located at 38 Washington Square South. Said property currently lies within the Residential Two-Family(R-2) District. A letter and plan describing the proposed amendment is on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department of Planning & Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. • Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: 10/6/2014 and 10/13/2014 n f This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on SEP ;3 0 29��. at L�z�N in accordance with MGL hap. 36A, Sections 18-25. v 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM.COM a CITY OF SALEM • PLANNING BOARD 1814 SEP 30 FP 2- 52 FILE #f CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS City of Salem Notice Joint Public Hearine of the Planning Board and City Council October 20, 2014, 7:00 P.M. The Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing pursuant to MGL c.40A s.5 with the City Council on Monday, October 20, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 93 Washington St,,Salem, MA for all persons interested in the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map of the City of Salem to extend the Residential Two-Family (R-2) District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. A portion of said property currently lies within the R-2 District and a portion of said property currently lies within the Business Wholesale and Automotive (B-4) District. A letter and plan describing the proposed amendment is on file and available for review during normal • business hours at the Department of Planning & Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: 10/6/2014 and 10/13/2014 This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. onSEP 3 O 2014 at in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALFM.COM L _ - Tmu, QUINN, GROVER &. FREY, P.C. 27 CONGRESS WILLIAM jr.TINTI SALEM, STREET,SUITE 414 dntiOdntilaw.com MASSACHUSETTS 01970 -• WILLIAM F.QUINN TELEPHONE _ WILLIAM B.AP DIFF(1965-1995) WilEamFQuinn®sol.cwm (978)7458065 •(978)7442948 SCOTT M.GROVER MARCIA MULFORD CDR - amgroveeodwilaw.com TELECOPIER OF COUNSEL MARC P,FREY (9Z8)745-3369 JOHN D.KEENAN mpfrey®dndlaw.wm www.dndlaw.com OF COUNSEL JONATHAN M.OFILOS JE PARISELLA jofiloSftindlaw.com .' 1 THOMAS I.HOGAN tjbogau®rintilew.com .."�,�l�,t,�' MARCY D.HAUEER �/ fa =6Ubet®dntilaw.com CQ President Robert K. McCarthy and July 8, 2014 Salem City Councilors E2 /Q4 City Hall �0�f 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Proposed Petition to Rezone Property at 38 Washington Square South President McCarthy and Councilors: i Enclosed please find the Petition of my client, Three Corners Realty Trust (the "Trust"), Dorothy L. Harrington, Trustee; requesting that the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended by • . extending the existing B-5 Central Development District to include the ad' and building known as 38 Washington Square South. )scent parcel of land We Heather Famico for introducing this Petition to you on our behalf. ard 3 Councilor, The Trust Owns and holds title to the land and buildings that comprise the Hawthorne Inn, located On the Common at 18 Washington Square West,Salem, including its including Central adjacent parking lot. The Hotel and its adjacent parking lot are located in the Cit Development (8-5) Zoning District, as identified on the City of Salem Zoning Ma is an allowed Principal use in that District under Section 3 of the current Zoning Ordinance. In 2012, the Trust purchased and acquired title to the property at 38 Washington Square South, which directly abuts the Hotel's parking lot. That property, shown as Parcel No. 0425 on City of Salem Assessors Map 35, is currently located in the Residential Two-Family (R-2) Zone as shown on the City of Salem Zoning Map, and since acquiring it, the Hotel has operated 38 Washington Square South as a single-family residence. Corporation dated June 27, 2014, showing the.Included herewith is a Plot Plan of the parcel prepared by North Shore Survey streets, and the abutting lots, their owners anparcel and buildings, it's Zoning, the adjacent d their addresses. Copies of this letter, the Salem Planning Board. Petition and an original Plot Plan have been filed also with the Salem City Clerk and the City of • i • Page 2 Salem City Councilors As you know, the Hawthorne Inn is a primary venue for tourist accommodations and social and business functions in the City of5al nd family functions. The Hotel would like to enhance its fferings to he C, and hosts many ity and its lvisitors ness aby using the property at 38 Washington Square South for tourist accommodations, small weddings, wedding party accommodations, and small outdoor functions during daylight hours. Such uses are not presently allowed under its existing R-2 Zoning, but would be allowed if the Zoning Map is amended to include that parcel in the B-5 District with the Hotel. The applicant believes that such action would be in the public and City's interest, as it will add public accommodations for tourists visiting the City, and would be additional and a different variety of space for family and business functions in the City. It will also add Jobs to Salem's employment base, and increase the City's tax base once assessed accordingly. It is our understanding1hat with Council's consent, the next step would be to refer the Petition to the City of Salem Planning Board to schedule a joint City Council/Planning Board • public hearing on the Petition. Thank you all for your consideration of this matter, which is of significant importance to my client. Please let me know-of any actions and scheduled hearing dates, and let me know if I may assist you in your deliberations in any way. Very truly yours, William F. Quinn cc. Mayor Kimberly Driscoll Elizabeth Rennard, City Solicitor Salem City Clerk Cheryl A. LaPointe Salem Planning Board Judi Lederhaus Michael J. Harrington • PETITION TO SALEM CITY COUNCIL Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A To Rezone Land To see if the City of Salem Wil(vote to amend the City of Salem Zoning August f real r as am ended,�by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include th Map dated Parcel of real property situated at 38 Washington Square South, located between Washington Square South and Essex Street, shown as Parcel No. 425 on Assessor's Ma e consisting of about.13 acres of land. Said property would be rezoned from Residential Two-Family (R-2)to Central Business Developmentp No. 35 and attached descriptive plot plan prepared and stamped by a registered land surveyor. (B-5), and is bounded and described on the • • Fk MAP 35 LOT 414 ZONE B-5 THREE CORNERS REALTY TRUST DOROTHY HARRINGTON, wood 19.90' ten TRUSTEE ° 98 ESSEX STREET 21.37' GARAGE ri 1 '29.88, I I I I MAP 35 LOT 424 ZONEq \ I CASTINE REALTY R6TRU `� \ THOMAS O'DONNELLI) II co MAP 35 LOT 412 TRUSTEE • WASHINGTON io I I THREE CORNERS to MAP 35 LOT 412 I REALTY TRUST SQUARE SOUTH AREA=5580tS.F. I I DOROTHY I 3 STORY HARRINGTON. DWELLING I I TRUSTEE 8 WASHINGTON DECK #38 SQUARE WEST I I 1 I I 51.72I / - 17.55' WASHINGTON SQUARE SOUTH PLOT PLAN OF LAND 38 WASHINGTON SQUARE SOUTH SALEM PROPERTY OF THREE CORNERS REALTY TRUST • SCALE 1" = 20' JUNE 27, 2014 NORTH SHORE SURVEY CORPORA71ON 14 BROWN STREET — SALEM, MA 978-744-4800 #4082 City of Salem, MA 10/20/2014 Interactive Map z i�v r FYy on � RC i f� " i i -r-r 1' g rte... ��N��• _ WASHINGTONSOB,_ t `-'} z t 4 .. L-_7 kka" ST 9 � cop ', I X75Ir no 1 Property Information \ Property ID 350425 0 Location 38_WASHINGTON SQUARE SO MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT Because ofdifferent update schedules,cunent property assessments may not reflect recent changes to property .'boundaries.Check with the Board of Assessors to confirm . baundades wed at tlma of assessment. City of Salem In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section L That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the following described area of real property located at 38 Washington Square South as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 35, Parcel 0425, from R-2 Residential Two-Family District to B-5 Central Development District by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include this parcel. Section II. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. • 35 Forrester Street Salem. MA 01970 September 30,2014 Dear Ms Lederhaus; As an 17 year resident of Salem and a neighbor of the Hawthorne Hotel, I wish to support the Hawthorne Hotel management in the request for a Bed and Breakfast facility at Washington Square South, between the Hotel parking lot and O'Donnell Funeral Home. The Hotel is and continues to be the heart of Salem. The beauty of the area is enhanced by the continuous maintenance of the hotel inside and outside. There is never any problem in the neighborhood with the clientele of the hotel. The guests have ample parking thus there is not a problem with overflow of cars into the neighborhood. Any time my family or friends come to visit, the first place requested to stay is at the Hawthorne Hotel. To have another venue, a B and B under the sponsorship of the Hotel,would be wonderful addition to the Hotel property.New England is famous for hospitality and culture as well as intellectual achievement. All the qualities possessed • by the Hawthorne Hotel management and staff. I would enjoy staying at any facility under the Hotel management, as would my friends and family . The management and staff of the Hotel have been fantastic neighbors, good citizens and most all supportive of the culture of Salem . If there is any additional information needed please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely; Maryann Curtin • Coan ® ood psSSo�� P.O. Box 8608 Salem Ma 01970 October 19, 2014 Planning.Board City of Salem Salem; Massachusetts01970 • To whom it may concern; The Salem CommonNeighborhood Association is in full support of the Hawthorne Hotel's plan to turn,the residence at 38 Washington Square South into a guest house that is part of the hotel. We believe that the hotel will bean excellent steward of this property and that there will be no adverse impact upon the neighborhood'by changing. the zoning designation. The hotel is an integral part of the Common neighborhood and has been generous in its support to neighborhood activities.and organizations. Sincerely;_ Ann Sousa SCNA President • Stephen P. Lovely, Esq. Lovely Law Group,LLP 10 Federal Street Suite 411t Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone 978-745-8274 stepleen,lovely@verizon,net F 978-745-657I n 4 t f Salem City Council September 22, 2014 N City of Salem 93 Washington Street Lim .r1 Salem, MA 01970 RE: Request for Zone Change �`p 43 Bridge Street, Salem, Massachusetts (Old Salem Plumbing Building) Assessors Map A Parcel 0238-0 Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council: ease be advised hat this office represents Joseph A. Skor I nurski, Skomursk Development tLLC of o Bradstreet Avenue Danerss Massachusetts. of • Skomurski Development LLC has entered into an used• estate located at 43 Bridge Street Salem, Massachusetts owned by the Salem Plumbing Agreement to Purchase certain real Supply Co., Inc,Jason G. Sevinor, President. This letter is a formal request by Skomurski Development, LLC as a party with an interest in land affected by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem to rezone a Portion of the property located at 43 Bridge Street from a B-4 District to an R-2 District and that the Zoning Map of the City of Salem be amended to show that redesignation: Please accept this Petition to the City Council requesting that the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended by extending the R-2 District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street (Old Salem Plumbing Building), A portion of the premises lie within the current B- 4 District nd apremises lie within the current R-2 District. If the Petition is allow d�theof the entire premises of said property would lie within the R-2 District. The subject area is intended to be redeveloped as the site of single family homes. Yin ly this uest to the lanning Board of the assignment of a�publc hearing date and IPwould for request of Salem that the City Council additionally establish a hearing date. tY • Vet:urs,--- Stephen P. Lovely, Esq. • PETITION TO SALEM CITY COUNCIL Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A to Rezone Land The Petitioner requests that the City Council of the City Salem vote to amend the City of Salem Zoning Map dated August 27, 1965, as amended, by extending the current R-2 Zoning District by incorporating within the current R-2 Zoning District the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. Such amendment to the Zoning Ordinance intending to include that parcel of real property situated at 43 Bridge Street, located at the intersection of Planters Street, and consistingof a Bridge Street and approximately 0.336 +/- acres. Said property, also P known as the P rtY, e Old SalemPlumbmgBu�ding, would be rezoned in its entirety from its current split between the B-4 and R-2 Districts to entirely within the R-2 District, is bounded and described as follows: The land situated in said city of Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts,with an address of 43 Bridge Street, bounded and described in Exhibit A attached hereto. E PARCEL I. XHIBIT A Westerly by Bridge Street • Northerly by land now or formerly of Weinstein and now or formerly of Salem Plumbing Supply Company Inc. Easterly by other way of the mortgagor or formerly of Salem Plumbing Supply Company Inc. Southerly by Planters Street. PARCEL II. Northerly by land now or formerly of Pierce and White, twenty-three feet three inches(23'3°), Easterly by land now or formerly of heirs of Ellen Mulready fifty-five (55)feet; Southerly by Planters Street, 35 feet; Westerly by land of mortgagors and formerly of was informally of Salem Plumbing Supply Company Inc. fifty-five feet right inches (55'8") Being the same property conveyed to Salem Plumbing Supply Co., Inc. by deed dated and recorded at the Essex South Registry of Deeds in Book 5330 Page 476. • City of Salem In the year two thousand and fourteen An Ordinance to amend an Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as,follows: Section L That the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the portion of the parcel of real property located at 43 Bridge Street as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 36, Parcel 0238, from B-4 Business Wholesale and Automotive to R-2 Residential Two-Family District by extending the R-2 Residential Two-Family District to include the entire parcel.. Section II. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. • • City of Salem, MA 10/20/2014 Interactive Map 4 A w / i / y , R2 1 �- t§ r 1 1 1 y ! { i { feet fJ Property Information Property ID 36_0238_0 Location 43 BRIDGE STREET MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT Because of different update schedules,current property - assessments may not reflect recent changes to property boundaries.Check with the Board of Assessors to confirm boundaries used at time of assessment. i Iron Pipe (Fnd) Map 36 Lot 239 W N/F Ido Sevinor 13 Planters St. N14'32 44*E ,1 55.00' Mop 36 Lot 234 N/F New England Power Co. Waite St. Mop 36 Lot 238 14,610 sg.ft. 0.34 acres ZONE R2 ZONE B4 WAITE STREET ro x 1 Story Building � v - � y Map 36 Lot 236 m NSF 01 r rn o Cri Angela Gelenfodakis 39 Bridge St. •'�„�N �^ ZONING DISTRICT — 84 & R2 REFERENCES., Mop 36 Lot 237 1) Deed Book 5330 Page 476 N/F 2) Plan #781 of 1946 Crete LLC #43 3) Plan Book 303 Plan 24 41 Bridge St. Bridge Street 4) Plan #636 of 1955 3 Story Building PLOT PLAN 43 BRIDGE STREET SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS Prepared For Joseph Skomurski Prepared By LeBlanc Survey Associates, Inc. 161 Holten Street — Danvers, MA 01923 sz5.46''w 4 (976) 774-6012 s.a6' September 23, 2014 Scale: 1"=20' BRIDGE STREET HOR. SCALE IN FEET 0 20 50 100 oc j vr�J'b • OCTOBER 20,2014 2-0 0,V14- JOINT V14- JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING BOARD U A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held in the Council Chamber on Monday, October 20, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. for the purpose of discussing an amendment to the Zoning map to extend the B-5 Central Development District to include the property located at 38 Washington Square South. Also to amend the Zoning map for the property located at 43 Bridge Street to be changed from B-4 District to R-2 District. Notice of this meeting was posted on October 10, 2014 at 10:51 A.M. and advertised in the Salem News on October 6, 2014 & October 13, 2014. Absent were: President Robert K. McCarthy presided. President McCarthy introduced the members of the Planning Board. Zoning map amendment to extend the B-5 Central Development District to include the property located at 38 Washington Square South. APPEARING IN FAVOR WERE THE FOLLOWING: • F P APPEARING IN OPPOSITION WERE THE FOLLOWING Councillor Famico moved that the hearing be closed Voted . Councillor Famico moved that the matter be referred to the Planning Board for their recommendation. Voted 4\ Zoning map amendment for the property located at 43 Bridge Street to be changed from B-4 District to R-2 District. APPEARING IN FAVOR WERE THE FOLLOWING: • • 1 APPEARING IN OPPOSITION WERE THE FOLLOWING • Councillor Famico moved that the hearing be closed Voted Councillor Famico moved that the matter be referred to the Planning Board for their recommendation. On the motion of Councillor the hearing adjourned at P.M. • PETITION TO SALEM CITY COUNCIL Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A To Rezone Land To see if the City of Salem will vote to amend the City of Salem Zoning Map dated August 27,1965, as amended, by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include the parcel of real property situated at 38 Washington Square South, located between Washington Square South and Essex Street, shown as Parcel No. 425 on Assessor's Map No. 35 and consisting of about .13 acres of land. Said property would be rezoned from Residential Two-Family (R-2) to Central Business Development (B-5), and is bounded and described on the attached descriptive plot plan prepared and stamped by a registered land surveyor. • • MAP 35 LOT 414 ZONE 8-5 THREE CORNERS REALTY TRUST DOROTHY _ HARRINGTON 19 90 � "Dba dence - TRUSTEE I 98 ESSEX STREET _ w 21-37' GARAGE rry I` 29.88, _ � I MAP 35 LOT 424 ZONE �j � I CASTINE REALTY R2 TRUST I MAP 35 LOT 412 co THOMAS O'DONNELL TRUSTEE I co THREE CORNERS • 46 WASHINGTON io REALTY TRUST SQUARE SOUTH m MAP 35 LOT 412 rl AREA=5580tS.F. I I DOROTHY I I HARRINGTON, 3STORY I I TRUSTEE DWELUNG18 WASHINGTON DECK #38 I SQUARE WEST I _ I I I I I 51.72' 17'.55' i I WASHINGTON SQUARE SOUTH PLOT PLAN OF LAND 38 WASHINGTON SQUARE SOUTH SALEM PROPERTY OF THREE CORNERS REALTY TRUST SCALE 1" � 20' JUNE 27, 2014 NORTH SHORE SURVEY CORPORATION 14 BROWN STREET — SALEM, MA 978-744-4800 #4082 TINTI, QUINN, GROVER & FREY, P.C. 27 CONGRESS STREET,SUITE 414 SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 WILLIAM J.TINTI •[inti@tintilaw.com WILLIAM B.ARDIFF(1965-1995) WILLIAM F.QUINN TELEPHONE MARCIA MULFORD CINI WilliamFQuinn@aol.com (978)745.8065 • (978)744.2948 OF COUNSEL SCOTT M.GROVER TELECOPIER JOHN D.KEENAN smgrover@tintilaw.com - (978)745-3369 OF COUNSEL MARC P.FREY www.tintilaw.com JERALD A.PARISELLA mpfrey@tintilaw.com OF COUNSEL JONATHAN M.OFILOS jofilos@tintilaw.com THOMAS J.HOGAN tjhogan@tintilaw.com MARCY D.HAUBER mhauber@tintilaw.com July 8, 2014 President Robert K. McCarthy and Salem City Councilors City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Proposed Petition to Rezone Property at 38 Washington Square South President McCarthy and Councilors: • Enclosed please find the Petition of my client, Three Corners Realty Trust (the "Trust"), Dorothy L. Harrington, Trustee, requesting that the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended by extending the existing B-5 Central Development District to include the adjacent parcel of land and building known as 38 Washington Square South. We thank Ward 3 Councilor, Heather Famico for introducing this Petition to you on our behalf. The Trust owns and holds title to the land and buildings that comprise the Hawthorne Inn, located On the Common at 18 Washington Square West, Salem, including its adjacent parking lot. The Hotel and its adjacent parking lot are located in the City's Central Development (B-5) Zoning District, as identified on the City of Salem Zoning Map, and the Hotel is an allowed principal use in that District under Section 3 of the current Zoning Ordinance. In 201_2, the Trust purchased and acquired title to the property at 38 Washington Square South, which directly abuts the Hotel's parking lot. That property, shown as Parcel No. 0425 on City of Salem Assessors Map 35, is currently located in the Residential Two-Family (R-2) Zone as shown on the City of Salem Zoning Map, and since acquiring it, the Hotel has operated 38 Washington Square South as a single-family residence. Included herewith is a Plot Plan of the parcel prepared by North Shore Survey Corporation dated June 27, 2014, showing the parcel and buildings, it's Zoning, the adjacent streets, and the abutting lots, their owners and their addresses. Copies of this letter, the • Petition and an original Plot Plan have been filed also with the Salem City Clerk and the City of Salem Planning Board. • Page 2 Salem City Councilors As you know, the Hawthorne Inn is a primary venue for tourist accommodations and social and business functions in the City of Salem, and hosts many weddings, business and family functions. The Hotel would like to enhance its offerings to the City and its visitors by using the property at 38 Washington Square South for tourist accommodations, small weddings, wedding party accommodations, and small outdoor functions during daylight hours. Such uses are not presently allowed under its existing R-2 Zoning, but would be allowed if the Zoning Map is amended to include that parcel in the B-5 District with the Hotel. The applicant believes that such action would be in the public and City's interest, as it will add public accommodations for tourists visiting the City, and would be additional and a different variety of space for family and business functions in the City. It will also add jobs to Salem's employment base, and increase the City's tax base once assessed accordingly. It is our understanding that with Council's consent, the next step would be to refer the Petition to the City of Salem Planning Board to schedule a joint City Council/Planning Board • public hearing on the Petition. Thank you all for your consideration of this matter, which is of significant importance to my client. Please let me know of any actions and scheduled hearing dates, and let me know if I may assist you in your deliberations in any way. Very truly yours, f ` � William F. Quinn cc. Mayor Kimbe-ly 'v'r ISCOII Elizabeth Rennard, City Solicitor Salem City Clerk Cheryl A. LaPointe Salem Planning Board Judi Lederhaus Michael J. Harrington • • 35 Forrester Street Salem. MA 01970 September 30,2014 Dear M Led rh a s e aus; As an 17 year resident of Salem and a neighbor of the Hawthorne Hotel, I wish to support the Hawthorne Hotel management in the request for a Bed and Breakfast facility at Washington Square South, between the Hotel parking lot and O'Donnell Funeral Home. The Hotel is and continues to be the heart of Salem. The beauty of the area is enhanced by the continuous maintenance of the hotel inside and outside. There is never any problem in the neighborhood with the clientele of the hotel. The guests have ample parking thus there is not a problem with overflow of cars into the neighborhood. Any time my family or friends come to visit, the first place requested to stay is at the Hawthorne Hotel.To have another venue, a B and B under the sponsorship of the Hotel,would be wonderful addition to the Hotel property.New England is famous for hospitality and culture as well as intellectual achievement. All the qualities possessed • by the Hawthorne Hotel management and staff. I would enjoy staying at any facility under the Hotel management, as would my friends and family . The management and staff of the Hotel have been fantastic neighbors, good citizens and most all supportive of the culture of Salem . If there is any additional information needed please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely; Maryann Curtin • 4 CO 77 1 ood P.O. Box 8608 Salem Ma 01970 October 19, 2014 Planning.Board City of Salem Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • To whom it may concern: The Salem Common Neighborhood Association is in full support of the Hawthorne Hotel's plan to turn the residence at 38 Washington Square South into a guest house that is part of the hotel. We believe that the hotel will bean excellent steward of this property and that there will be no adverse impact upon the neighborhood,by changing the zoning designation. The hotel is an integral part of the Common neighborhood and has been generous in its support to neighborhood activities and organizations. Sincerely; r � Ann Sousa SCNA President • City Of.Salem In the year two thousand and fourteen Aa OrXinance to amend ordinance relative to Zoning Map change Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section L That the City of Salem Zoning Map, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the following described area of real property located at 38 Washington Square South as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 35, Parcel 0425 from R-2 Residential Two-Family District to B-5 Central Development District by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include this parcel. • Section IL This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. .r ", 3 PETITION TO SALEM CITY COUNCIL Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter VA to Rezone Land The Petitioner requests that the City Council of the City Salem vote to amend the City of Salem Zoning Map dated August 27, 1965, as amended, by extending the current R-2 Zoning District by incorporating within the current R-2 Zoning District the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street. Such amendment to the Zoning Ordinance intending to include that parcel of real property situated at 43 Bridge Street, located at the intersection of Bridge Street and Planters Street, and consisting of approximately 0.336 +/- acres. Said property, also known as the Old Salem Plumbing Building, would be rezoned in its entirety from its current split between the B-4 and R-2 Districts to entirely within the R-2 District, is bounded and describedas follows: The land situated in said city of Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts,with an address of 43 Bridge Street, bounded and described in Exhibit A attached hereto. EXHIBIT A PARCELI. Westerly by Bridge Street Northerly by land now or formerly of Weinstein and now or formerly of Salem . Plumbing Supply Company Inc. Easterly by other way of the mortgagor or formerly of Salem Plumbing Supply Company Inc. Southerly by Planters Street. PARCEL II. Northerly by land now or formerly of Pierce and White, twenty-three feet three inches (23'3"); Easterly by land now or formerly of heirs of Ellen Mulready fifty-five (55) feet; Southerly by Planters Street, 35 feet; Westerly by land of mortgagors and formerly of was informally of Salem Plumbing Supply Company Inc. fifty-five feet right inches (55'8") Being the same property conveyed to Salem Plumbing Supply Co., Inc. by deed dated and recorded at the Essex South Registry of Deeds in Book 5330 Page 476. • 7 Von Pipe (Fnd) Mop 36 Lot 239 N/P Ido S.*ww 13 Plont.St. 1 N14'SVE 5500' Mop J6 lot 2J1 NIP y New EnandSt Co. wane St. Map 36 Let 239 "'610 ag.B. a34 aaee ZONE R2 ZONE B4 WAITE STREET I Story euudmg n Map N1 236 3 a�I R1 M9tle Gtleotadekie J9 Bndge St. ZONING DISWICT—B4 k R2 Map 36 Lot 237 REFFRENCES1)Deed Book SJ30 Poo@ 476 Cre1�LC NS 2)R.1781 o11946 a C Bndpe Sheet 3)Plop Book JOS Plan 24 41 Bridge J e Str 4)Plop 16M of 1955 oy Building PLOT PLAN 43 BRIDGE STREET SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS Prepared For Joseph Skomurski Prepared By LeBlanc Survey Associates, Inc. l 161 Holten Street szs'�1'ol'w Danvers, MA 01923 4546 (978) 774-6012 September 23, 2014 Scale: 1"=20' BRIDGE STREET HOR. SCALE IN FEET 0 20 50 100 ti Stephen P. Lovely, Esq. Lovely Law Group, LLP 10 Federal Street Suite 4111 Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone 978-745-8274 Fax 978-745-6573 stephen.lovely@verizon.net s f q September 22, 2014`�� a Salem City Council City of Salem 4 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 3 RE: Request for Zone Change 43 Bridge Street, Salem, Massachusetts (Old Salem Plumbing Building) Assessors Map 36, Parcel 0238-0 Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council: Please be advised that this office represents Joseph A. Skomurski, Sr. of • Skomurski Development, LLC of 107 Bradstreet Avenue Danvers, Massachusetts. Skomurski Development LLC has entered into an Agreement to Purchase certain real estate located at 43 Bridge Street Salem, Massachusetts owned by the Salem Plumbing Supply Co., Inc, Jason G. Sevinor, President. This letter is a formal request by Skomurski Development, LLC as a party with an interest in land affected by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem to rezone a portion of the property located at 43 Bridge Street from a B-4 District to an R-2 District and that the Zoning Map of the City of Salem be amended to show that redesignation. Please accept this Petition to the City Council requesting that the City of Salem Zoning Map be amended by extending the R-2 District to include the entire parcel located at 43 Bridge Street (Old Salem Plumbing Building). A portion of the premises lie within the current B-4 District and a portion of the premises lie within the current R-2 District. If the Petition is allowed the entire premises of said property would lie within the R-2 District. The subject area is intended to be redeveloped as the site of single family homes. Kindly forward this request to the Planning Board of the City of Salem for assignment of a public hearing date and I would respectfully request that the City Council additionally establish a hearing date. • Very rul yours, Stephen P. Lovely, Esq. City of Safi= In the year two thousand and fourteen e An t7rrftttance to amend ordinance relative to Zoning Map change Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section I. That the City of Salem Zoning Map, in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 5, by rezoning the portion of the parcel of real property located at 43 Bridge Street as shown on the City of Salem Assessor's Map 36, Parcel 0238, from B-4 Business Wholesale and Automotive to R-2 Residential Two-Family District by extending the R-2 Residential Two-Family District to include the entire parcel. Section IL This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date 10 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email NZL C W& y -S'Lf3-5z00 ,, O �SF wt e So f eJ�n�e(e U3 N iCVLblS A 9_788-01 016S swiK"t 4a YwaLl • • Page of 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, October I e,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA— REVISED* I. ROLL CALL n =4 � o II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES `— o • September 18,2014 Meeting Minutes m �r • September 11,2014 Meeting Minutes -revisions rn Ln III. REGULAR AGENDA 3 Location: 72 Flint Street and 6741 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" w • (Map 26,Lots 91,95 & 97) o© Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping, and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219& 231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit,and a Stormwater Management Permit, for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. *Applicantrequests to continue to the Board's November 6�meeting Location: 107 Highland Avenue (Map 14,Lot 198) Applicant: Robert Willwerth Description: Discussion and vote on a request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,to allow the exterior of the building to be finished with new . vinyl siding,rather than the approved repainting and/or replacement of the original clapboard materials. Page 1 of 2 •J V City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for October 16,2014 Meeting • IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Board discussion regarding Request for Comment/Input on FY15 Community Preservation Plan—Board comments due by November 20b • Report by Board Member Bill Griset on Downtown Biking Audit • Report by Staff Planner on October 6th Complete Streets Working Group meeting V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance§2-2028 tbrougb J 2-2033. • w This notice posted on "Officia Bullet' Board"'/ City H411,.Salem. Nhss on o 7 a3in accordan a th MGL Chap. A, Sections ,95. Page 2of2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 W W W.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM • PLANNING BOARD _ n � o { r- O m n NOTICE OF MEETING x= t F. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduleetinggn Thursday, October 16`6, 2014 at 7:00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, U 120 Washington St., Salem, MA 4?t Charles M. Puleo, ( air p MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • September 18,2014 Meeting Minutes • September 11,2014 Meeting Minutes -revisions III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lots 91,95& 97) • Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping, and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403,0405 &0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review, a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit,and a Stormwater Management Permit,for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure,associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 107 Highland Avenue (Map 14, Lot 198) Applicant: Robert Willwerth Description: Discussion and vote on a request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,to allow the exterior of the building to be finished with new vinyl siding,rather than the approved repainting and/or replacement of the original . clapboard materials. Page 1 of 2 City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for October 16,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Board discussion regarding Request for Comment/Input on FY15 Community Preservation Plan—Board comments due by November 206 • Report by Board Member Bill Griset on Downtown Biking Audit • Report by Staff Planner on October 6th Complete Streets Working Group meeting V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance 2-2028 tbrough 2-2033. • This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall. Salem, Masn on o20/31, at in accutdance with (NGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. Page 2 of 2 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM "xONDI CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS • r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning and Community Development DATE: October 10, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting-October 16,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda for 10/16/2014 regular meeting ➢ Agenda for 10/20/2014 joint public hearing with City Council ➢ Planner's Memo ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes -September 18, 2014 ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes-September 11, 2014-previously approved,need revisions ➢ Updated 11x17 plans for Riverview Place application ➢ 107 Highland Avenue request for insignificant change and original Planning Board Decision on 107 Highland Avenue,dated 5-9-2014 ➢ Community Preservation Plan comment/input worksheet APPROVAL OF MINUTES Please note that after the original approval of the September 11th, 2014 joint public hearing minutes,we received comment from a member of the public that their statement had been mis- represented. Please see page 4 of the included minutes for the revisions. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street-"Riverview Place" (Map 26, Lots 91,95 & 97) The applicant has submitted revised Site Plan and Landscape drawings,as well as an updated Stormwater Management Report and Drainage Report. The updated drawings are included in your packet. I have also saved the drawings,along with the updated reports, in the dropbox folder for this meeting. 2. 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405 & 0406) City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—October 10, 2014 Page 2 of 2 The applicant is currently working on responses to initial comments by the civil engineering peer • review consultant(New England Civil Engineering) and the traffic&parking peer review consultant (AECOM). The applicant would like to discuss the traffic&parking peer review(AECOM) findings and the applicant's responses at this October 16th meeting. I sent out AECOM's original findings prior to the September 18th meeting-you can still find these in the September 18th dropbox folder. 1 have not yet received the applicant's responses. 3.107 Highland Avenue (Map 14, Lot 198) This project received Planning Board Site Plan Review approval in May of this year. Part of the Board's discussions on this project concerned the proposed finished materials,and as a result,the following condition was included in the Board's decision: "16 j. The existing vinyl siding shall be removed and the entire structure shall be repainted with historically appropriate colors. Any architectural details that require replacement such as trim and clapboards will be replaced with materials of a like kind" At the time of the Board's approval,the applicant had found that there were clapboards underneath the vinyl siding. As construction has proceeded,the applicant has found that repair and repainting of the clapboards (which were exposed upon removal of the vinyl siding) would be very costly. The applicant is now requesting the Board's approval of an insignificant change to allow the installation of"high quality vinyl siding" rather than repainting/replacing the clapboards. The applicant sent supporting materials (demonstrating the cost estimates and the proposed vinyl siding),but 1 did not receive them in time to include in this packet- I will be emailing them to you, and saving them to the dropbox meeting folder. OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS The Community Preservation Committee (CPC) is required to update its Community Preservation Plan annually. As part of this process,they are soliciting the Planning Board's input. Helen Sides, the Planning Board's representative to the CPC,will provide an update on current CPA projects. I have also saved a copy of the FY14 Community Preservation Plan in the dropbox folder for this meeting, for your review. The Board must develop a consensus and put their comments in writing no later than Thursday, November 20th. City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date c� / L '� / 2QD1 -4- Name Mailing Address Phone # Emaail��Nx � I� IV�Loo S�. 5ow�.�vj&E 6f7 9d,316?a-' 1 tcG mss. s � Swfew 4zF -7ur-5,6 G5 Sp�,�as � �ni4 f,, Jo✓��� E� O�,IoS 2? C, uav(ss r �- 1 f) Dy/LinSt 5A g7574(OQO5 Mvq:�'1o72CRaol�(or) / 7 _T�liq loa Sj So�V}er wl� �P�7 (oa3 'g3/S" Yvl i' / 'llc. r 1 r I O�,r1 SQ Sm lid gam' M�fi� fNm c �i t�f f-F.c�� vac s� (� (v1 V tbg2 �IKx ,o�TK APs�,�� �AGK �A6/�K 3SGc3ly7 J sly�p �D �9CFvJ !tB 7,K- � 40 ,,,(((GAdG�I'� L( e( y�Uc phnv 17eac �rxr 51 1222' o00S e �9 l� w�vv� pZ 2 'oSL7� __c Page of CITY OF SALEM m PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, September 18'h,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair REVISED MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES rn • September 4,2014 Special Meeting Minutes • September 11, 2014 Joint Public Hearing with City Council Meeting Minutes C/1 ro o III. REGULAR AGENDA �n Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" r (Map 26,Lots 91,95 &97) m'z Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment E&the t tt • previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal CorridoYDistriR Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Applicant requests to continue to the Board's October 16h meeting Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403,0405& 0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 162&150 Federal Street(Map 26, Lots 2&96) Applicant: Renewal Ventures,LLC,Assignee of rights granted to William Wharff Description: Board discussion and vote on the request for a six (6) month extension to commence construction authorized by the September 25,2012 Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Planning Board Decision for conversion of a former convent to eight (8) residential units. • City of Salem Planning Board REVISED Agenda for September 18,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Board discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture'; `Mens'; 'Run `Coop, `Tlbestock'; and `Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table ofPrincipal andAccersory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use, to be allowed by-right in RC,R1,R2,R3,Bl,B2,134,135,I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. • Board Nomination and Vote for the Planning Board representative to the Complete Streets Working Group. V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L a 30A 118-25 and City Ordinance§2-2028 through J 2-2033. • This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Salem, Ma--s. on . I at e 1� in accordance wi c. Chap. 30A, Sections 1-25. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 SEP I I P I: 32 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK, SALEM,MASS You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,September 18'h,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a September 4,2014 Special Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26,Lots 91,95 &97) Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District • Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Appdcant requests to continue to the Board's October 166 meeting Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 162&150 Federal Street(Map 26,Lots 2&96) Applicant: Renewal Ventures,LLC,Assignee of rights granted to William Wharff Description: Board discussion and vote on the request for a six(6) month extension to commence construction authorized by the September 25,2012 Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Planning Board Decision for conversion of a former convent to eight(8)residential units. rV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS a Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment'To the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban ' • Agrculture'; 'Hens" `llun'; `Coop'; `71'aertock'; and `Curtomaryagncu/tural, horkarkuraland This notice posted on "Oficial Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on SEP 1 1 1014 at �rt in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Qawfinna-4R-9r. S City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for September 18,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal andAccessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use,to be allowed by-right in RC,Rl,R2,R3,Bl,B2,B4,B5,I, and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture'under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. V. ADJOURNMENT Knomyour rights under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L c. 30A f 18-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 through J 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW.SALFM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 OCT - P October 1,2014 CITY CLERK,SALEM, MASS. Renewal Ventures, LLC c/o George W. Atkins III Ronan, Segal & Harrington 59 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: 162 & 150 Federal Street (Map 26, Lots 2 & 96) Decision of Planning Board to grant request for a six (6) month extension to commence construction authorized by the September 25,2012 Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Planning Board Decision for conversion of a former convent to eight (8) residential units. The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, September 18, 2014 to discuss your request for the the September 25 2012 approval of a six 6 month extension to commence construction authorized b PP ( ) Y P • Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Planning Board Decision for conversion of a former convent to eight(8)residential units. A letter submitted by Attorney George W. Atkins, III, on behalf of Renewal Ventures, LLC, on September 3, 2014, requests allowance to extend the permits granted by the Planning Board in a Decision date-stamped September 25, 2012, for an additional period of six (6) months. The petitioner states that the additional time is necessary in order in order to complete environmental remediation of the property. The action required by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection is expected to be completed within the requested extension period. Mr. William Wharff,the original applicant and holder of the Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit approvals, has entered into an Assignment Agreement with Renewal Ventures, LLC, as stated in a September 2, 2014 letter by Attorney Scott M. Grover. This letter was submitted to the Planning Board with the extension request. The assignment agreement includes Mr. Wharff's rights regarding the Planning Board approvals. The requested six-month extension would commence on September 25, 2014,which is the expiration date of the current Decision. The requested extension would expire on March 25, 2015. The Planning Board voted nine (9) in favor (Mr. Puleo —Chair, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Koretz, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed,to grant the approval of the requested six (6)month extension of the Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decision dated September 25, 2012. This determination shall become part of the record for this project. • If you require further information,please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning& Community Development at (978) 619-5685. Sincerely, ChA,(k.aj, Charles Puleo, Chairman Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • • -2- CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND f COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ��G!MINEP' KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL 120 WASHINGTON STREET 1 SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 MAYOR TEL:978-745-9595 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNGAN,AIC' DIRECTOR MEMORANDUM To: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk From: Lynn Duncan, Director Cc: Beth Rennard, City Solicitor Re: Planning Board Recommendation—"Urban Agriculture" zoning amendment Date: October 1, 2014 Attached please find the Planning Board report to City Council regarding the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning the addition of a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run", "Coop", "Livestock", and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory • Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Urban Agriculture"use, to be allowed by- right in RC, RI, R2, R3, B1, B2, B4, B5, I, and BPD zones; and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses: • s CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD toia OCT — i P 2* 14 FILE # Report to City Council CITY CLERK, SALEM,MASS. October 1, 2014 At its meeting on September 18, 2014 the Planning Board voted to recommend as follows on the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment regarding the amendment of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture" `liens" `Run", "Coop", 'livestock", and `Customag agncultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal andAccessog Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture" use, to be allowed by-right in RC,Rl,R2, R3,Bl,B2, B4,B5, I, and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses: The Planning Board recommends that Sections I and II of the proposed amendment remain unchanged,but suggests the following modifications to Section III of the proposed amendment (modifications are shown in italics and deletions): Section 3: Section 3.2 Accessory Uses is hereby amended by adding the following provision,immediately • following Section 3.2.6 Commercial Vehicles: 3.2.7 Urban Agriculture. 1. Sale of eggs and any other agricultural products is prohibited. 2. The keeping of hens shall be subject to the following rules: a) Hens may shall be kept per the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations on properties in residential use only. b) Ownership, care and control of the hens shall be the responsibility of a resident of the dwelling on the lot. c) If the keeper of the hens is not the lot owner,written permission from the lot owner permitting the keeping of hens on the lot shall be attached to the Board of Health permit application. d) No roosters may shall be kept under an Urban Agricultural use on lots in Salem e) No coop or run shall be located nearer than ten (10) feet to the any principal building, including the principal building on an abutting lot, and no coop or run shall be located nearer than 4-5 eight(8) feet to any side or rear lot line. Side lots in this instance refer to a projected line starting from the front lot line, terminating at • the rear lot line parallel 45 eigbt(8) feet from the side o- 15 feet from the_e _lot CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD line. No coop or run shall be located within any required front yard or within any side yard of a comer lot. f) Coops and runs shall not exceed six*eight(8) feet in height, and shall have a combined area of no more than 120 square feet or ow(1)pates 6f the lar aria, 7r&daerer is&ester. Construction of a chicken coop and run shall not preclude the location of additional accessory structures, such as garages and tool sheds, and as described under Section 3.2.4 Accessory Buildings and Structures, on the same property. �41,,e en site slaughtering ef-hers is prel ked. 1 \ Ne per, u N ...1,.,.... : uild...g a . :\ o.typ ., ,7,,4ingt,, keep 1.,,,,,. ..hag,...pl te the u,.,.Fd- ,.f He-..lth fee .,..:. g) Arty bees-keepinguse orstrz nae in eristerxeprior to the adaption 6f 6u anrnhwe shall be • allov¢ to c mrai4 as per the zoning axle a fortemrya standards c(other pre-existing wxarrforrmt uses and strudu ns. A ny f*d m alterations to applicable preeeistirg usesor strucum shall seek the necessary approuds. The complete revised version of the proposed amendment, as recommended for approval by the Planning Board, is attached. The Planning Board voted, five (5) in favor (Mr-.Puleo,Ms.Yale,Mr. Rieder,Mr. Clarke,and Mr. Griset) and one (1) (Mr. Anderson) opposed,to recommend the proposed zoning amendment with the above listed revisions. In making this recommendation,the Planning Board made note of the following: Regarding the setback requirement: • Three (3) Board members (Ms. Sides,Mr. Clarke,and Ms. Yale) were of the opinion that the setback requirements for hen coops and runs should be consistent with the setback requirements for accessory buildings and structures laid out in the existing zoning code (being five (5) feet,per Section 3.2.4). • Six (6) Board members (Mr. Griset,Mr. Puleo,Mr. Veno,Mr. Koretz,Mr. Rieder,and Mr. Anderson) were of the opinion that hen coops and runs would have a larger impact on abutters than the typical accessory structures currently provided for in the zoning ordinance (such as garages and tool sheds) and as such,should be subject to greater setback • requirements. Mr. Griset,Mr. Puleo,Mr. Veno,Mr. Koretz and Mr. Rieder were of the opinion that eight (8) feet would be adequate,while Mr. Anderson held that at least ten (10) feet should be required. 1� A CITY OF SALEM[ PLANNING BOARD • The Board's recommended modifications to the proposed zoning amendment, as approved by a five-to-one vote of the Board,to require an eight (8) foot setback, reflects this majority opinion. Regarding the relationship of the draft Board of Health regulations and the draft Zoning Amendment: • The Board recommends striking items 3.2.7 g, h, and i from the proposed zoning amendment (g.the on-site slaughtering of hens is prohibited;h. no person shall keep any hens in any building used as a dwelling; i. any person desiring to keep hens shall apply to the Board of Health for a permit) as these fall within the purview of the Board of Health, and should not be addressed in the Zoning Code. • The Planning Board requests that the City Solicitor provide clarification on the appropriate delineation between the purview of the Board of Health regulations and the Zoning Code, with the intention of clarifying which issues should be exclusively addressed in the Zoning Code and which issues should be exclusively addressed in the Board of Health regulations. Regarding the comment at the Joint Public Hearing that the "Urban Agriculture" use not be allowed "by-right" in the Business Park Development (BPD) District: • • The proposed zoning amendment is structured such that"urban agriculture", including the keeping of hens,shall only be allowed"on properties in residential use". • If the City Council should decide that the "urban agriculture" use should only be allowed in the BPD District by Special Permit,then the Planning Board recommends that City Council specify that the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the permit-granting authority. 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. Yours truly, C; O -A . 1&e./ Charles M. Puleo Chair Attcrdiirerrt CQ Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • Citp of balem In the year Two rlhousand and Fourteen ffn ®rbinance to amend the Ordinance relative to Zoning Be it ordained 6y the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section 1. Section 10.0 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by adding the following definitions: Urban Agriculture: An umbrella term that describes a range of food growing practices for personal consumption and uses that may include the keeping of hens,but does not include other livestock, and does not include the selling of agricultural products. Hens: Female chickens. Run: an outdoor enclosure generally made of wire mesh. • Coop: An enclosed shelter in which a chicken lives. Livestock: any domestic animals raised for home use, consumption, or profit, such as horses,pigs, llamas, goats, fowl, sheep,buffalo,and cattle. Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations: the growing or harvesting of agricultural,horticultural and floricultural crops,the raising of all classes of livestock, the production of eggs, milk,honey and other animal products, or the carrying out of any other prescribed agricultural activity or process, for the primary purpose of making a profit or providing a livelihood. Does not include residential gardening for personal consumption or use, nor the keeping of hens in accordance with the regulations for Urban Agriculture, as described herein. Section 11: Section 3.0 TABLE OF PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY USE REGULATIONS is hereby amended by adding the following new row immediately following Adult day care under E. Accessory Uses: RC R1 R2 R3 B1 B2 B4 B5 I BPD • Urban Agriculture Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y • �+ection 111: Section 3.2 Accessory Uses is hereby amended by adding the following provision,immediately following Section 3.2.6 Commercial Vehicles: 3.2.7 Urban Agriculture. 1. Sale of eggs and any other agricultural products is prohibited. 2. The keeping of hens shall be subject to the following rules: a) Hens shall be kept per the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations on properties in residential use only. b) Ownership, care and control of the hens shall be the responsibility of a resident of the dwelling on the lot. c) If the keeper of the hens is not the lot owner, written permission from the lot owner permitting the keeping of hens on the lot shall be attached to the Board of Health permit application. d) No roosters shall be kept under an Urban Agricultural use on lots in Salem II' • e) No coop or run shall be located nearer than ten (10) feet to any principal building, including the principal building on an abutting lot, and no coop or run shall be located nearer than eight(8) feet to any side or rear lot line. Side lots in this instance refer to a projected line starting from the front lot line, terminating at the rear lot line parallel eight(8) feet from the side lot line. No coop or run shall be located within any required front yard or within any side yard of a comer lot. f) Coops and runs shall not exceed eight(8)feet in height, and shall have a combined area of no more than 120 square feet or one (1)percent of the lot area, whichever is greater. Construction of a chicken coop and run shall not preclude the location of additional accessory structures, such as garages and tool sheds, and as described under Section 3.2.4 Accessory Buildings and Structures, on the same property. g) Any hen-keeping use or structure in existence prior to the adoption of this amendment shall be allowed to continue, as per the zoning code enforcement standards of other pre-existing nonconforming uses and structures. Any future alterations to applicable pre-existing uses or structures shall seek the necessary approvals. • ffiertion IV. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by City Charter. ' City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 Page 1 of 10 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,September 18,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,September 18, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:04 pm. Roll Call Those present were: Chuck Puleo-Chair, Ben Anderson-Vice Chair, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, Kirt Rieder, Dale Yale, Bill Griset, Matthew Veno and Noah Koretz.Absent: None. Also present: Dana Menon,Staff Planner,and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Approval of Minutes September 4,2014 Meeting Minutes The votes of new member Noah Koretz need to be added to the minutes. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to approve with revisions the September 4, 2014 Meeting Minutes seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0) opposed. September 11,2014 Joint Public Hearing with City Council Meeting Minutes No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote:Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the September 11 2014 Joint Public Hearing with City Council Minutes seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0)opposed. Chair Puleo noted the order of business has been slightly adjusted with the agreement of all presenting parties. Regular Agenda Location: 162&150 Federal Street(Map 26,Lots 2&96) Applicant: Renewal Ventures, LLC,Assignee of rights granted to William Wharff Description: Board discussion and vote on the request for a six(6) month extension to commence construction authorized by the September 25, 2012 Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit Planning Board Decision for conversion of a former convent to eight(8) residential units. Documents and Exhibitions: • • Letter from Attorney George W.Atkins, III requesting a six(6) month extension, dated September 3, 2014 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 Page 2 of 10 • Correspondence dated September 2, 2014 from Atty Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover& Frey, • PC;on behalf of original permitee William Wharff. • Copy of Planning Board Decision approving Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for 162 & 150 Federal Street, dated September 25, 2012. Attorney George Atkins, III, of Ronan,Siegel & Harrington 59 Federal Street; presented for the applicant. Atty Atkins reminded the Board the original decision by the Planning Board was made 2 years ago,the Zoning Board decision dates to 2009. He advised the original permitee, Willliam Wharff, has assigned the development rights to Renewal Ventures, LLC. In 2012 there was a judgment entered in Superior Court,the appeal is pending. The sellers of the property have not yet completed environmental remediation of the site.The action required by the state Department of Environmental Protection is expected to be completed within the requested extension period.At that time the transfer of the properties will proceed and construction can begin.They expect to return to the Planning Board with an ANR plan before the end of the six months. Chair Puleo read into the record the letter from Atty Scott Grover, representing William Wharff, dated September 2, 2014. The letter states that the Variances and Special Permits issued by the Salem Planning Board and Salem Zoning Board of Appeals are subject of an Assignment Agreement between Mr. Wharff and Renewal Ventures, LLC. The letter also states consent to the request by Renewal Ventures, LLC to extend the term of the Variances and Special Permits obtained. Motion and Vote: Matt Veno made a motion to authorize a sixLL6J month extension to commence construction PrevioyUl authorized by the September 25 2012 Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard district S ecial Permit Plannin Board Decision seconded bY Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with nine 9 in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr.Anderson. Ms Sides Mr Clarke Mr. Rieder Ms Yale Mr. Gnset Mr Venn and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET(Map 26,Lots 91,95&97) Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision, North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit.Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking, order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection.The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Documents and Exhibitions: • Letter dated September 17,2014 from Attorney Scott M. Grover,representative of the applicant,requesting to continue the public hearing to the Board's October 16,2014 regular meeting. • City of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 • Page 3 of 10 Board Discussion: Chair Puleo read into the record the letter September 17, 2014 letter from Attorney Scott Grover requesting the continuance. Motion and Vote: Dale Yale made a motion to continue the public hearing to the Board's October 16, 2014 meeting seconded by Ben Anderson The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson Ms Sides Mr. Clarke Mr. Rieder. Ms Yale Mr. Griset Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none (0)opposed. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure,associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. • Documents and Exhibitions: • Slide presentation entitled Washington at Dodge Development Proposal, dated Sep 18, 2014 • Photometric plans,titled "Calc Study" "Parking Garage—Lower Level"; "Parking Deck and Light Trespass Study"; "Parking Garage—Upper Level",dated 17 September 2014, drawn by Available Light, 10 Derby Square#3,Salem, MA 01970. • "Shadow Studies" sheet, by Khalsa Design Inc. ,Sheet No.A-910. Matthew Picarsic, Managing Principal for RCG, LLC(developer) presented for the applicant. Other presenters included: • Seth Zeren, Development Manager, RCG, LLC • David Giangrande, PE, MS; President, Design Consultants Inc., 120 Middlesex Avenue, Somerville, MA(civil engineering and land surveying) • Matthew Zelkowitz, IALD, LC; Principal,Available Light, 10 Derby Square, Salem MA. • Jai Singh Khalsa, Khalsa Design Inc., 17 Ivaloo St#400,Somerville, MA Mr. Picarsic noted there is additional information to share with regard to: architectural context, shadow study, photometric plan, some elements of signage and landscaping, bike infrastructure, HVAC systems, and truck circulation.They are still waiting for resolution regarding peer reviews with regards to traffic and utilities;the city peer reviewers and developer consultants will be meeting to work through details. Mr. Picarsic presented renderings of the site plan to re-orient members to the key elements; including a • new rendering showing a long view of the site from approximately 120 Washington Street, looking south. City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 18, 2014 Page 4 of 10 Shadow Study(A910) Drawings- Jai rawings Jai Singh Khalsa, Khalsa Design Group, presented key elements of the shadow study, which shows that most of the shadows fall within the site due to the north-south orientation of the site.The plan shows some street shading on Washington, Dodge Street and Dodge Street Court as the day lengthens; especially at summer solstice. Fall/spring equinox indicates shadows casting onto Walgreens. Generally not casting shadows on property owned by someone else;the shadows are cast either within this site or adjacent property owned by same owner, Photometric Plans and Lighting Matt Zelkowitz from Available Light presented the photometric and lighting plans. Drawings represent the three main levels of the development.The plan does not include City street lighting. • Parking Court:average of 3.4 foot candles on the surface of the parking deck. The plan exceeds the LEED guideline at the entry from the street into the parking area.The Board asked about Dodge Street Court lights on the facade of the building and was advised they are very narrow; there is no light trespass along Dodge Street Court.The light poles on the parking deck have all downlight fixtures, no uplights. • 2nd Level:average of 8.0 foot candles in the upper garage level. The Board asked if the plan is to mechanically ventilate the garage?Proponent representatives advised yes;the garage is enclosed except for the entrances on Dodge Street Court.The Board asked to know how dramatic the difference is between inside/outside light levels when entering/exiting garage. Mr. Zelkowitz pointed out an adaptation zone at the garage entrance,and confirmed this has been • considered and planned to promote safety. • Lower Level:lower lev elara g ge lighting employs the same strategy and fixtures. During the truck access discussion (see below)The Board raised a question regarding some details of the photometric plan.Specifically the plan needs to show the fixture at the southwest corner of the site in its correct position in relation to the sidewalk, and adjust the foot candles on the plan. Also during the truck access discussion, the Board explored a concern about excessive light spillover onto residential apartments adjacent the parking deck entrance. Mr.Zelkowitz advised the light spill goes west toward Washington Street and the Canal Street intersection. They will add a house-side shield to protect the apartments. Sinae Seth Zeren from RCG provided an overview, and noted that ultimately the Salem Redevelopment Authority(SRA) and Design Review Board (DRB) will have final approvals on any signage. • Tenant signage—final signs will be determined when tenants are selected. • Way-finding signage—the proponent expects to seek a waiver from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)for hotel signage as highly visible signs are very important for this business to succeed. The proposed plan has specs outside current zoning parameters. • Seeking Planning Board support for their general signage plan to take to the ZBA. • The Board clarified the vertical banners (Sunbrella-type fabric) are intended to not be color- block but will have text/corporate entity; Mr.Zeren confirmed, yes. Ms. Sides advised the DRB • Y City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 18, 2014 • Page 5 of 10 (Design Review Board)will be addressing the size,fabric type and maintenance of any proposed signage.The Board expressed a concern for appearance as these banners age. • The Board asked if the proponent must return to the DRB for new signage approval in the event a specific hotel deal falls through and that signage was approved. Ms. Sides confirmed the proponent would need to seek new approval for a new hotel tenant unless the original approval was for a generic design. • The Board expressed their concern regarding scale of the signage and urged the proponent and DRB members not to be pushed into something too large. • The Board encouraged the DRB to not allow a generic hotel sign, but to wait for the brand entity before issuing any approval. • Several members of the Board noted that the parking"P"way-finding signs as depicted on the renderings are too big. Chair Puleo advised the Planning Board will not be able to endorse the signage concept at this time. Signage needs to be considered in full context and the Board is waiting for more discussion on traffic issues. Landscaping Elements Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation and offered the following: • Willing to replace existing street trees with Valley Forge Elm along Dodge St Court. • Defer final paver selection for loading area on Dodge Street Court to coordinate with hotel interior design with review by SRA and DRB. • Bicycle Facilities Mr. Zeren continued the presentation. Storage in lower garage for residential tenants; providing spaces for approximately 30 bikes. Developer's experience with other residential projects has been that planned bike storage has been under-utilized. Bike facilities could be expanded into the garage in non- secure spaces, if demand required. • Developer likes the idea of a bicycle repair station—will try to fit it in. • In addition to garage storage,there are spaces for 60 bikes situated at various locations around the site. Design will be post with circle/standard U, not a primary color but something more subtle that will complement the building exterior. • City is examining bike-share options along Washington Street. The Board suggested the developer consider storage for retail employees/office employees in the lower garage too or somewhere on the property. HVAC Systems Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation. • Rooftop units will be screened and/or set back to minimize impact. TAC units with central coolin • North building will use individual P g tower on the roof, central boiler for common areas. • Commercial spaces will have chases to the roof for venting and individual units on the roof for space conditioning; emergency generator. • South/West Building apartments will have cooling from a central cooling tower above the main • lobby(the connector).There is an area created by building height variation that was identified for locating and screening this equipment. City of Salem– Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 18, 2014 Page 6 of 10 The Board inquired about the noise concerns for HVAC. Mr. Khalsa advised that the roof setbacks are • not for noise impact but for visual impact. Generators will be natural-gas fired. The Board asked the height of the cooling tower and service access. Mr. Khalsa advised about 8-feet.These are now made of plastic which doesn't rust. Service access will be provided via elevator and staircase to the roof. Truck Access Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation. • The straightening of Dodge Street from Lafayette to Washington Streets will provide more access for delivery trucks.A right turn from Washington onto Dodge Street will add new access. • A turn from New Derby onto Dodge Street Court(one-way)will be much easier. o The Board asked if proponent has actually talked to the printing company that expressed concern about truck loading off of Dodge Street Court in the proposed plans. The proponent indicated that they had not yet.The Board encouraged proponent show this proposed plan to the business owner. to • David Giangrande of Design Consultants recalled the owner stated that delivery trucks come in from Lafayette Street onto Dodge Street Court.The new design will prohibit exiting via Dodge Street Court back to New Derby,but trucks will be able to continue along and go straight out Dodge Street to Washington Street.All turning movements have adequate space. Making Dodge Street Court one-way will not prohibit deliveries to the printer. • Raised elements on Dodge Street to discourage cut-through traffic. Board Discussion: The Board asked for information about the exterior material palette. Mr. Picarsic confirmed material • boards will be presented at next meeting. The Board asked how the timeline for the laying of new National Grid line impacts the timeline for this project. Mr. Picarsic stated the developer cannot start this project until this transmission cable is finalized and have timeline from National Grid. Latest understanding is to start removing cable in spring 2016 and will do the section on Washington Street first. New installation must be complete before old cable can be removed.The jobs must be sequential, they cannot be concurrent: New cable installed, Old cable removed, Start this project. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: Josh Turiel—Ward 5 City Councilor, 238 Lafayette Street; provided his latest understanding of the National Grid relocation.The utility expects final state approval in early Nov 2014. The work will take an estimated 16-18 months total time. Early 2016 is a good estimate to be able to start this project. Mr. Clarke raised the matter of the proponent's request for approval of a range of program options, and asked the chair when the Board should take up this matter Ms. Menon advised the matter has been brought to the City Planner Lynn Duncan,who has sought an . opinion from the City Solicitor.This opinion will be relayed to the Planning Board. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 Page 7 of 10 Chair Puleo indicated his understanding is that if a hotel is not part of the final programming,the proponent will need to resubmit alternatives to the Planning Board for approval. Mr. Picarsic indicated the proponent expects some discussion at the next Planning Board meeting that takes up this subject. Chair Puleo advised the next meeting should include peer review experts. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing to the next regular Mannino Board meeting on October 16 2014 seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr.Anderson Ms Sides Mr. Clarke Mr. Rieder Ms. Yale, Mr. Griset, Mr. Veno and Mr. Koretz)and none(0)opposed. 0—1 d/N-em Business Continued Board discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run","Coop", "Livestock",and"Customary agricultural,horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new Urban Agriculture use,to be allowed by-right in RC,R3, • R2, R3, B3, B2, B4,BS, I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses.This Board discussion is open to the public,but is not a Public Hearing. Documents and Exhibitions: Draft Ordinance prepared by City planning staff; previously presented to the City Council and Planning Board. Chair Puleo reminded audience the public hearing on the proposed Ordinance amendment had been closed; members of the public may observe Board deliberations. City Council has 90 days from close of public hearing to make first passage. He then summarized that some of the main concerns identified by members of the public and Planning Board: setback requirements and whether existing keeping of hens will be "grandfathered". Chair Puleo clarified the Board of Health (BoH) regulation is a draft; that Board of Health is still receiving public comment and will make revisions prior to their next meeting.The original Board of Health draft was provided to the Planning Board for information and context. Several Board members indicated they found the Board of Health Regulation draft too prohibitive and punitive.The Board discussed how they should consider the Board of Health regulations draft. Collectively the Planning Board expressed their concern that the Board of Health regulations stepped into zoning matters. It was suggested the letter to the City Council might be the best place to express the Planning Board's collective concern with regard to Board of Health over-reach into zoning definitions. • Ms. Menon advised people would have to conform to both sets of regulations(Board of Health regulations and the zoning ordinance), and so the most restrictive would prevail. The City Solicitor is City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 18, 2014 Page 8 of 10 looking into the appropriate division of responsibility and legal separation of the roles of the Zoning Ordinance and the Board of Health on this issue. Several members of the Board voiced the need to protect abutting property owners from runoff, debris/waste blow-over and visual impact.The Board discussed at some length concerns about compliance and considered a range of restrictions that could be added to the ordinance to ensure the protection of abutters. Ultimately the Board determined the City already has mechanisms to follow-up on non-compliance: neighbors may call the Board of Health,the building inspector or other appropriate authorities in the event of a dispute. After an extensive discussion about grandfathering, the Board collectively agreed it is not necessary to add grandfathering language to the draft ordinance, as it is already intrinsically allowed by law. People should have to apply for variances or inspection to provide a public forum for discussion with neighbors and/or abutters. There is already provision in the zoning code for existing coops to meet the definition of a preexisting non-conforming use. If these owners make significant changes to their coops/runs,then they must conform or seek a variance. Varying opinions on the matter of setbacks and coop height: • Everyone agreed a coop/run should be considered an accessory structure. • Some Board members stated that keeping chickens is not a right of citizenship. It has a larger impact on abutters than other"accessory structures"like tool sheds. Salem is a densely populated area. . • Some Board members stated that a coop should conform to the same setback requirements currently required for any accessory structure. • All agreed that setback requirements are needed.The current Zoning ordinance calls for accessory structures to be set back 5-feet from any side/rear lot line or 10-feet from building on same lot or abutting lot. any other Clear differences among the individual Board members were apparent: • Mr. Clarke and Ms.Sides were in favor of setting setbacks, but in general believe that the existing regulatory agencies should handle this matter, and the City should keep the ordinance broad. • Mr.Anderson and Mr. Griset, while not opposed to chicken-keeping, expressed concern for the rights of non-chicken abutters, property values and that the issue is being driven by a small minority of very vocal citizens.The Board and City Council have not heard enough from citizenry that does not keep chickens. Chair Puleo conducted a review of the current draft ordinance clause by clause to determine the key areas of disagreement: Section 1 definitions—no disagreement Section II table of use—no disagreement • It was noted that Councilor Segal's concern about allowing hen keeping by-right in the BPD zone may be addressed by the fact that the draft ordinance states that only properties in residential use may keep hens. Section III, Item 2. • r Ili City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 p Page 9 of 10 Ifp • A, b, c, and d-no disagreement,just change the word "may" in items a) and d)to"shall'for consistency of language. • Item e) needed further discussion regarding setback requirements • Item f) after brief discussion of the height limit of six feet (complementing the height limit of fencing),the Board concluded the maximum height of the coop should be revised to eight feet, matching the height limit of accessory buildings. • Item g), h), and i)-after brief discussion the Board agreed these should be deleted from the draft. Chair Puleo focused the discussion on the matter of setbacks.The Board quickly reached agreement to add language to include an abutting principal building in the setback requirement. The setback requirement of side/rear lot lines at 15 feet was debated.The final straw poll of opinion was: • In favor of amending to 5 feet to be consistent with the existing setback for accessory buildings: (Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Ms.Yale) • In favor of amending to 8 feet to provide more separation because these are live animals not a tool shed: (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Griset, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Koretz and Mr.Veno) • Mr.Anderson indicated he was willing to compromise from the original 15 feet to 10 feet but no less. After extensive discussion the Board generally agreed to the following edits of the draft ordinance: • Section 3.2.7, 2: items "a" and "d"; replace the word "may"with "shall'. • Section 3.2.7, 2e: amended with italicized text: "No coop or run shall be located nearer than ten (10)feet to any principal building including the principal building on an abutting lot, and no coop or run shall be located nearer than eight(8)feet to any side or rear lot line. Side lots in this instance refer to a projected line starting from the front lot line,terminating at the rear lot line parallel eight(8)feet from the side lot line ... • Section 3.2.7.f:inserted "or 1%of the lot area,whichever is greater" and adjusted the allowed height of the coop from six to eight feet.The amended sentence now reads: "Coops and runs shall not exceed eight(8)feet in height,and shall have a combined area of no more than 120 square feet or 1%of the lot area,whichever is greater..." • Section 3.2.7.g should be deleted,this matter best left to the Board of Health • Section 3.2.7.h should be deleted,this matter best left to the Board of Health • Section 3.2.7.i should be deleted. • A section should be added clarifying the grandfathering of existing hen keeping. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the draft ordinance with revisions subject to review by the City solicitor,seconded by Dale Yale. The vote of eligible members was five(5)in favor(Mr. Puleo Ms Yale Mr. Clarke Mr. Rieder and Mr. Griset)and one(1)opposed(Mr.Anderson). Board Nomination and Vote for the Planning Board representative to the Complete Streets Working Group. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 18, 2014 Page 10 of 10 Chair Puleo advised the Board that Mr. Clarkereviousl P y appointed, has regretfully had to decline the appointment due to other commitments. After discussion it was clear that Planning Board members cannot commit without having more specifics on when the meetings will be. Planning Board members have no availability on Thursday nights. Ms. Menon was asked to get more information including length of term and meeting schedule. The Board will attempt to identify an appointee via email. Adjournment Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adiourn the meeting seconded by Matt Veno The vote was unanimous with nine(91in avor Mr. Puleo Mr.Anderson Ms. Sides Ms. Yale Mr. Clarke Mr. Rieder Mr. Griset Mr. Veno and Mr. KoretzJ and none 0 opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 10:15pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: httl2://www.salem-comZPages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 10/16/2014 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ' IUIU SEP -5 A I1: 2U FILE # NOTICE OF MEETING UTY CLERK, SALEM. MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council will be holding a Joint Public Hearing on Thursday,September 11,2014 at 7:OOpm at City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington Street Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. REGULAR AGENDA A continuation of the joint public hearing with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run", "Coop", "Livestock", and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations" under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under . Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use,to be allowed by-right in RC, Rl, R2, R3, B1, 132, 134, 135, I, and BPD zones; and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. III. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour tights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-23 and City Ordinance§2-2028 through J 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on SEP 0 5 2014 at //!24 A/V in accordance with MGL Chap. 3QA, Sections 18-25. uh City of Salem—Planning Board CORRECTED Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 Page 1 of 5 City of Salem Planning Board&Salem City Council CORRECTED Meeting Minutes Thursday,September 11,2014 A continuation of a joint public hearing of the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council was held on Thursday,September 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m.at City Council Chambers, City Hall,93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. City Council President Bob McCarthy opened the meeting at 7:08pm. City Council business preceded this agenda item whose discussion began at 7:37pm. Roll Call Planning Board members present were:Chuck Puleo, Ben Anderson, Randy Clarke and Kirt Reider. Absent: Helen Sides,Dale Yale,Matthew Veno, Bill Griset and Noah Koretz. City Councillors present were: Robert McCarthy, President,William Legault, Elaine Milo,Arthur Sargent, Heather Famico,Josh Turiel, Beth Gerard,Joseph O'Keefe,Thomas Furey and Todd Siegel. Absent: David Eppley. Also present: Lynn Duncan,City Planner, Dana Menon,Staff Planner,Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk,and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. • Agenda 1 A continuation of the joint public hearing,opened on July 29,2014,with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for "Urban Agriculture", "Hens" "Run" "Coop", "Livestock", and 'Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by-right in RC, Rl, R2, R3, Bl, B2, B4, BS, 1,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. President McCarthy introduced the agenda item by briefly summarizing work to date on this matter and reminding the Council that this is a continuation of a joint public hearing. The public hearing has been kept open to enable all stakeholders (Board of Health, Planning Board, interested members of the public and City Council, appropriate City departments, etc.) to collect and review information. Once the public hearing is closed, the Planning Board has 21 days to make recommendation to the City Council. The Council may then choose from a number of actions based on their comfort with the recommendation and suggested ordinance language from the Planning Board. President McCarthy resumed the hearing and invited City Planner Lynn Duncan to address City Council. Ms. Duncan suggested the chair of the Planning Board introduce its members in attendance and suggested staff planner Dana Menon provide an overview of the research conducted regarding other community practices and the approach to drafting the ordinance. • City of Salem—Planning Board CORRECTED Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Planning Board Chair Chuck Puleo introduced the members of the Planning Board in attendance. He noted that Ms. Menon has gathered quite a bit of additional information since the last meeting and invited her to provide a summary. Ms. Menon reported that several cities were contacted: Marblehead,Reading, Peabody, Boston and Somerville.The information collected included copies of ordinances and/or regulations.She also solicited feedback regarding"lessons learned"from the appropriate contact; most often a health department agent. • No city or town on the list allows the keeping of roosters. • Common issues with rodents but seems to be comparable to similar issues for composting. • Towns with new regulations did a lot of research up front. • Not as many enforcement issues as feared,fewer applicants than expected. • Peabody wanted to be inclusionary so implemented 2-tiers of setbacks based on lot size. • Boston not all zones eligible,they have recently updated their regulations but still does not allow hens across all zones. • Onsite slaughter is either not allowed,or was not addressed at all by the regulations/ordinance. City Council/Planning Board Discussion: • Councilor O'Keefe had several follow-up questions: o How many hens could be kept in 120 square feet of space? Ms. Meno advised 6 would generally be considered the maximum based on her research; but this level of detail will most likely be addressed in the Board of Health regulations not the zoning ordinance. o He noted a possible language discrepancy for items A-l; "shall"vs."may" in the draft • ordinance,specifically at item D. o Asked if the coop and run will be roofed to prohibit pests. Ms. Menon advised this detail will be addressed in the Board of Health regulations. • Councilor Siegel spoke against allowing hens in all zones.Specifically he recommended the City not allow them in BPD zones(business park development). Personal consumption doesn't fit here and companies have invested lots of money in their office locations; chickens are inappropriate. • Councilor Turiel spoke to clarify section E regarding setbacks. He recommended we have a process for people to request a variance for unique lots such as the current property owner on a large lot that has a coop built against a stone wall on the property line. He also indicated he is in favor of accommodating mobile coops. Ms. Menon advised the variance requests may be providing for through the existing zoning code. • Planning Board member Kirt Rieder followed up on Councilor O'Keefe's question about quantities of hens; is this most appropriately addressed in the zoning ordinance or Board of Health regulations? President McCarthy suggested this distinction might be addressed in the Planning Board recommendation. • Councilor O'Keefe asked if coops are completely enclosed with roof/top. Ms. Menon confirmed yes,some type of roof/top cover would be part of the structure. President McCarthy invited public comment: • ' City of Salem—Planning Board CORRECTED Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 Page 3 of S • Jennifer Bovey, 14 Beach Ave—has had chickens at this address since 2000. Hens are strictly pets, they do use the eggs but they have names and at end of life are not used for meat. Brings them into the house during very cold weather. Would like the ordinance to address chickens that are strictly pets,or health department/zoning board guidelines to address pets. • Lyle Barrett, 37 Broad St—regarding setbacks. His coop is only 8' from adjacent property and abuts the neighbor's shrubs—can there be a provision made for how far the chickens are from the neighboring house ratherthan the property line? • Nicole Williams, 37 Broad St—has 6 chickens and interested in getting more please do not restrict the number of hens allowed. • Michele Conway, 69 Orchard St—commented she finds the process of separate deliberations by the Planning Board and Health Board very confusing; suggested joint meetings would be more productive. The Health Department process seems very cumbersome and discriminatory towards chickens vs. dogs/cats.The height restriction is prohibitive. New ordinance should have a grandfather clause. Chicken coop waste allowed in composting bin recyling, not dog/cat waste. • Kristen & Kevin Cordy, 1 Orchard Terrace—in MA state regulations require a minimum of 6 chickens be purchased; no fewer. Inquired if the proposed ordinance would permit coops in a side yard parallel with the front of the house (lot has no front yard, the front step/porch is on the sidewalk/street). Lynn Duncan offered to further discuss and clarify the question with them outside of the meeting.They disagree with any increase in allowed height for coops on the basis the likely increase waste crossing property lines and the eyesore factor. Extended sincere thanks to the Planning Board fortheir research. • • Kathy Karch, 76 Memorial Drive—thanked the City Council and Planning Board for openness and communication with the public. Complimented the thoughtful research on practices in other communities.Specific comments: o Lack of a grandfather clause is a problem for those with existing coops/runs that do not meet the new standards o Disconnect between Planning Board and Board of Health. The Board of Health chair indicated there are overlapping points where the two groups differ; and that the Board of Health regulations will trump any zoning ordinances. o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.e: Somerville has a setback of only 3 feet, why can't we use this in Salem? o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.f: the proposed height restriction bans walk-in units; why can sheds be taller than coops? o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.i: directs applications to the Board of Health. Concerned the Board of Health is not drafting a permitting process that is reasonable. Requested City Councillors and Planning Board members to question the Board of Health regulations carefully. During the recent Board of Health meeting, during public comment period the Board was asked to explain the science behind their draft regulations.The Board refused to provide this level of detail. She urged the Planning Board to direct applicants elsewhere, noting that dog and cat permits are not routed through the Board of Health. • Pat Gazemba, 17 Sutton Ave—in support of all points made by Kathy Karch. Criticized the Board of Health; the draft regulations were not released until the day of the public hearing; leaving no time to review. The Board insisted they would not share their scientific research. Urged City Council and Planning Board to ask the questions of the Board of Health; regulations must be scientifically based. • r ' City of Salem–Planning Board CORRECTED Meeting Minutes–September 11, 2014 Page 4 of S • • Patrick Scanlan,42 Dearborn Street—served on the Salem Board of Health in the 1980s.Attended its meeting this week. Recent personal experience with new neighbors who added a 6-foot+ high coop in his backyard with no introduction or discussion. They have since worked it out. Common sense tells you there will be hygiene issues and predators coming into the neighborhood regardless of how well managed; but it can be worked out. To own chickens is not presumptive right; he encouraged Councillors and Planning Board members to be sensitive to non-chicken property owners. • Patricia Scanlan, 42 Dearborn St—spoke before the Board of Health; she is concerned the general quality of life in Salem will be affected by this decision. The Board of Health doesn't have the resources to deal with regulating this matter. Somerville has a rat problem. Ordinance draft is excellent, Board of Health regulations are tight but they should not be changed; if anything the City should increase the setbacks. Looking for City government to protect property values. Leave the setbacks as proposed. Was able to obtain the Board of Health draft regulations well in advance of its public meeting so if anyone was interested they were available from city hall. • Susan Harrison, 18 Naples Road—indicated she is more impacted by the proposed SSU parking garage which is huge; chicken coops are not such a problem. Emphasized the need to contact neighbors if adding chickens. There are problems with neighborhood cats. Compost pickup will not take cat/dog waste but will take chicken waste. Cannot effectively clean a coop that is only 6' tall. Requested a grandfather clause be added to the draft ordinance. Chickens covered by USDA. Some backyard people don't realize that USDA regulations will affect them; most commonly USDA testing requirements. • Pamela Bardini, 3 Larch Ave—the keeping of chickens and the public concerns regarding the proposed SSU garage seem to be silly comparisons in the same City Council meeting. Additional City Council/Planning Board Discussion: • • Councilor Famico attended the recent Board of Health meeting and urged people to get a copy of the regulations and review. She also urged Planning Board members to carefully review the draft Board of Health regulations. • Councillor Gerrard offered contacts at the Health department to get in contact with for questions: Heather Paul and/or Larry Ramden. • Councillor O'Keefe asked for clarification regarding ordinances vs. regulations for benefit of public questions. He explained that laws supersede regulations. Ordinance is the law; regulations are the interpretation of how to manage the law. • Councillor Turiel—offered clarification regarding the timing of the Board of Health in publicizing the draft regulations. City health agent Larry Ramden circulated an early draft version to City Councillors and City departments but it was not posted publicly until after the Board of Health meeting agenda was posted.The actual regulations were posted late in the day. • President McCarthy—indicated the Council will not be commenting on the administrative practices of the Board of Health and encouraged concerned individuals to take it up directly with the Board of Health. • City Planner Lynn Duncan—advised the Planning Board will work with the Board of Health to identify overlapping areas and ensure the proposed zoning ordinance and Board of Health regulations have no conflicts. • City of Salem—Planning Board CORRECTED Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Motion and Vote: Councillor Turiel made a motion to close the public hearing The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Turiel Mr. LeGault Ms Milo Mr.SargentMs Famico Ms Gerrard, Mr. Furey, Mr.Siegel and Mr. O'Keefel and none(0)opposed The public hearing was closed at 8:27pm,with no further discussion among the City Council or Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Councillor Turiel made a motion to refer the matter to the Planning Board for their recommendation. The vote was unanimous with nine 9 in favoLLMr. McCarthy, Mr. Turiel Mr.LeGault Ms. Milo, Mr.Sargent Ms Famico, Mr. Furey Ms Gerrard Mr. Siegel and Mr. O'Keefel and none(0) opposed. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk CORRECTED minutes approved by the Planning Board on 10/16/2014 • i City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 • Page 1 of 5 City of Salem Planning Board&Salem City Council Meeting Minutes Thursday,September 11, 2014 A continuation of a joint public hearing of the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council was held on Thursday, September 11,2014 at 7:00 p.m.at City Council Chambers,City Hall,93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. City Council President Bob McCarthy opened the meeting at 7:08pm. City Council business preceded this agenda item whose discussion began at 7:37pm. Roll Call Planning Board members present were:Chuck Puleo, Ben Anderson, Randy Clarke and Kirt Reider. Absent: Helen Sides,Dale Yale, Matthew Veno, Bill Griset and Noah Koretz. City Councillors present were: Robert McCarthy, President,William Legault, Elaine Milo,Arthur Sargent, Heather Famico,Josh Turiel, Beth Gerard,Joseph O'Keefe,Thomas Furey and Todd Siegel. Absent: David Eppley. Also present: Lynn Duncan, City Planner, Dana Menon,Staff Planner,Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk,and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. • Agenda A continuation of the joint public hearing,opened on July 29,2014,with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for "Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run" "Coop", "Livestock", and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 30; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by-right in RC, R1, R2, R3, B1, B2, B4, BS, I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. President McCarthy introduced the agenda item by briefly summarizing work to date on this matter and reminding the Council that this is a continuation of a joint public hearing. The public hearing has been kept open to enable all stakeholders(Board of Health, Planning Board, interested members of the public and City Council, appropriate City departments, etc.) to collect and review information. Once the public hearing is closed, the Planning Board has 21 days to make recommendation to the City Council. The Council may then choose from a number of actions based on their comfort with the recommendation and suggested ordinance language from the Planning Board. President McCarthy resumed the hearing and invited City Planner Lynn Duncan to address City Council. Ms. Duncan suggested the chair of the Planning Board introduce its members in attendance and suggested staff planner Dana Menon provide an overview of the research conducted regarding other community practices and the approach to drafting the ordinance. • .4 Y City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 Page 2 of 5 • Planning Board Chair Chuck Puleo introduced the members of the Planning Board in attendance. He noted that Ms. Menon has gathered quite a bit of additional information since the last meeting and invited her to provide a summary. Ms. Menon reported that several cities were contacted: Marblehead,Reading, Peabody, Boston and Somerville.The information collected included copies of ordinances and/or regulations.She also solicited feedback regarding"lessons learned"from the appropriate contact; most often a health department agent. • No city or town on the list allows the keeping of roosters. • Common issues with rodents but seems to be comparable to similar issues for composting. • Towns with new regulations did a lot of research up front. • Not as many enforcement issues as feared,fewer applicants than expected. • Peabody wanted to be inclusionary so implemented 2-tiers of setbacks based on lot size. • Boston not all zones eligible,they have recently updated their regulations but still does not allow hens across all zones. • Onsite slaughter is either not allowed, or was not addressed at all by the regulations/ordinance. City Councii/Planning Board Discussion: • Councilor O'Keefe had several follow-up questions: o How many hens could be kept in 120 square feet of space? Ms. Meno advised 6 would generally be considered the maximum based on her research; but this level of detail will most likely be addressed in the Board of Health regulations not the zoning ordinance. • o He noted a possible language discrepancy for items A-I; "shall"vs. "may" in the draft ordinance, specifically at item D. o Asked if the coop and run will be roofed to prohibit pests. Ms. Menon advised this detail will be addressed in the Board of Health regulations. • Councilor Siegel spoke against allowing hens in all zones.Specifically he recommended the City not allow them in BPD zones (business park development). Personal consumption doesn't fit here and companies have invested lots of money in their office locations; chickens are inappropriate. • Councilor Turiel spoke to clarify section E regarding setbacks. He recommended we have a process for people to request a variance for unique lots such as the current property owner on a large lot that has a coop built against a stone wall on the property line. He also indicated he is in favor of accommodating mobile coops. Ms. Menon advised the variance requests may be providing for through the existing zoning code. • Planning Board member Kirt Rieder followed up on Councilor O'Keefe's question about quantities of hens;is this most appropriately addressed in the zoning ordinance or Board of Health regulations?President McCarthy suggested this distinction might be addressed in the Planning Board recommendation. • Councilor O'Keefe asked if coops are completely enclosed with roof/top. Ms. Menon confirmed yes,some type of roof/top cover would be part of the structure. President McCarthy invited public comment: • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 • Page 3 of 5 • Jennifer Bovey, 14 Beach Ave—has had chickens at this address since 2000. Hens are strictly pets, they do use the eggs but they have names and at end of life are not used for meat. Brings them into the house during very cold weather. Would like the ordinance to address chickens that are strictly pets, or health department/zoning board guidelines to address pets. • Lyle Barrett, 37 Broad St—regarding setbacks. His coop is only 8' from adjacent property and abuts the neighbor's shrubs—can there be a provision made for how far the chickens are from the neighboring house rather than the property line? • Nicole Williams, 37 Broad St—has 6 chickens and interested in getting more please do not restrict the number of hens allowed. • Michele Conway, 69 Orchard St—commented she finds the process of separate deliberations by the Planning Board and Health Board very confusing; suggested joint meetings would be more productive. The Health Department process seems very cumbersome and discriminatory towards chickens vs. dogs/cats.The height restriction is prohibitive. New ordinance should have a grandfather clause. Chicken coop waste allowed in composting bin recyling, not dog/cat waste. • Kristen & Kevin Cordy, 1 Orchard Terrace—in MA state regulations require a minimum of 6 chickens be purchased; no fewer. Inquired if the proposed ordinance would permit coops in a side yard parallel with the front of the house (lot has no front yard, the front step/porch is on the sidewalk/street). Lynn Duncan offered to further discuss and clarify the question with them outside of the meeting.They disagree with any increase in allowed height for coops on the basis the likely increase waste crossing property lines and the eyesore factor. Extended sincere thanks • to the Planning Board for their research. • Kathy Karch, 76 Memorial Drive—thanked the City Council and Planning Board for openness and communication with the public. Complimented the thoughtful research on practices in other communities.Specific comments: o Lack of a grandfather clause is a problem for those with existing coops/runs that do not meet the new standards o Disconnect between Planning Board and Board of Health. The Board of Health chair indicated there are overlapping points where the two groups differ; and that the Board of Health regulations will trump any zoning ordinances. o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.e: Somerville has a setback of only 3 feet, why can't we use this in Salem? o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.f: the proposed height restriction bans walk-in units; why can sheds be taller than coops? o Draft Ordinance 3.2.7.i: directs applications to the Board of Health. Concerned the Board of Health is not drafting a permitting process that is reasonable. Requested City Councillors and Planning Board members to question the Board of Health regulations carefully. During the recent Board of Health meeting, during public comment period the Board was asked to explain the science behind their draft regulations. The Board refused to provide this level of detail, She urged the Planning Board to direct applicants elsewhere, noting that dog and cat permits are not routed through the Board of Health. • Pat Gazemba, 17 Sutton Ave—in support of all points made by Kathy Karch. Criticized the Board of Health; the draft regulations were not released until the day of the public hearing; leaving no time to review.The Board insisted they would not share their scientific research. Urged City Council and Planning Board to ask the questions of the Board of Health; regulations must be scientifically based. • . J City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 11, 2014 Page 4 of 5 • • Patrick Scanlon, 42 Dearborn Street—served on the Salem Board of Health in the 1980s. Attended its meeting this week. Believes Board of Health is discriminating against proponents of chicken keepers. Recent personal experience with new neighbors who added a 6-foot+ high coop in his backyard with no introduction or discussion.They have since worked it out. Common sense tells you there will be hygiene issues and predators coming into the neighborhood regardless of how well managed; but it can be worked out. To own chickens is not presumptive right; he encouraged Councillors and Planning Board members to be sensitive to non-chicken property owners. • Patricia Scanlon, 42 Dearborn St—spoke before the Board of Health; she is concerned the general quality of life in Salem will be affected by this decision. The Board of Health doesn't have the resources to deal with regulating this matter. Somerville has a rat problem. Ordinance draft is excellent, Board of Health regulations are tight but they should not be changed; if anything the City should increase the setbacks. Looking for City government to protect property values. Leave the setbacks as proposed.Was able to obtain the Board of Health draft regulations well in advance of its public meeting so if anyone was interested they were available from city hall. • Susan Harrison, 18 Naples Road—indicated she is more impacted by the proposed SSU parking garage which is huge; chicken coops are not such a problem. Emphasized the need to contact neighbors if adding chickens. There are problems with neighborhood cats. Compost pickup will not take cat/dog waste but will take chicken waste. Cannot effectively clean a coop that is only 6' tall. Requested a grandfather clause be added to the draft ordinance. Chickens covered by USDA. Some backyard people don't realize that USDA regulations will affect them; most commonly USDA testing requirements. • Pamela Bardini, 3 Larch Ave—the keeping of chickens and the public concerns regarding the proposed • SSU garage seem to be silly comparisons in the same City Council meeting. Additional City Council/Planning Board Discussion: • Councilor Famico attended the recent Board of Health meeting and urged people to get a copy of the regulations and review. She also urged Planning Board members to carefully review the draft Board of Health regulations. • Councillor Gerrard offered contacts at the Health department to get in contact with for questions: Heather Paul and/or Larry Ramden. • Councillor O'Keefe asked for clarification regarding ordinances vs. regulations for benefit of public questions. He explained that laws supersede regulations. Ordinance is the law; regulations are the interpretation of how to manage the law. • Councillor Turiel—offered clarification regarding the timing of the Board of Health in publicizing the draft regulations. City health agent Larry Ramden circulated an early draft version to City Councillors and City departments but it was not posted publicly until after the Board of Health meeting agenda was posted.The actual regulations were posted late in the day. • President McCarthy—indicated the Council will not be commenting on the administrative practices of the Board of Health and encouraged concerned individuals to take it up directly with the Board of Health. • City Planner Lynn Duncan—advised the Planning Board will work with the Board of Health to identify overlapping areas and ensure the proposed zoning ordinance and Board of Health regulations have no conflicts. • G 1 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 11, 2014 • Page 5 of 5 Motion and Vote: Councillor Turiel made a motion to close the public hearing. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Turiel, Mr. LeGault, Ms. Milo, Mr.Sargent, Ms. Famico, Ms. Gerrard Mr. Furey, Mr.Siegel and Mr. O'Keefe)and none(0)opposed. The public hearing was closed at 8:27pm,with no further discussion among the City Council or Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Councillor Turiel made a motion to refer the matter to the Planning Board for their recommendation. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Turiel, Mr. LeGault Ms. Milo, Mr. Sargent, Ms. Famico, Mr. Furey, Ms. Gerrard,Mr.Siegel and Mr. O'Keefe)and none(0) opposed. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at:http://www.salem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 9/18/2014 • • =� CITY OF SALEM a PLANNING BOARD I0I4 AUG 28 P bt 10 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,September,0,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. ELECTION OF OFFICERS • Nomination and Vote for Vice Chair III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • August 7,2014 Special Meeting Minutes IV. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26,Lots 91,95 &97) • Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Applicantreguests to continue to the Board's September 16m meeting Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. V. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Board Nomination and Vote for the Planning Board representative to the Complete Streets Working Group. • Continued Board discussion regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run","Coop", "Livestock", and • "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban This gMice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" Cit}rt fall, Salem, Mass. on AUG 2 8 2014 at l�.I0 Pm in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sec ions 18-25. City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for September 4,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 Agriculture"use, to be allowed by-right in RC,Rl,R2,R3,Bl,B2,B4,135, I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. This Board discussion is open to the public,but is not a Public Hearing. VI. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour righty under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance 2-2028 through J 2-2033. • • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.6195685 FAX 978.740,0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board GV1 1O Date �_��_� ZO 4 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email U,um 5attw\ QjS ?SCI QOD5zc'rao�.c / a RAL ul 6F J'7 r ��J ���'FiPP (lCy�6��iJJu*4�C EOd� 22�lnpo�hv�f— S � RZd' �Li`( o/i7 Nr novcoka�, aLn i-co, r 77�0 ✓ !/ r �G� /���Ell /✓� l _MA.fW -f-4t Ue4 � � a N Jlv >/ZS,/ftAA✓r 6"5)0 6r-2 �? 303 a 9 ,2 s7� pFscaAJL44VeAlz:µl. �i u y 5705 -�sCO-.o, I&h ve.v7U1q,W1f_ • Page of City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 • Page 1 of 12 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,September 4,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,September 4,2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor,at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:09 pm. Roll Call Those present were:Chuck Puleo-Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder, Dale Yale, Randy Clarke, Helen Sides, Bill Griset, Matthew Veno and Noah Koretz.Absent: None. Also present: Dana Menon,Staff Planner,and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Chair Puleo read into the record correspondence from Mayor Driscoll introducing newly appointed Planning Board member, Noah Koretz.A Salem resident, Mr. Koretz holds a JD from George Washington University Law School and a Masters degree in city planning from MIT. Mr. Koretz's legal experience includes real estate litigation (mixed use commercial, residential, construction and health code disputes). Currently working as program director for a Malden-based consortium receiving federal HOME funds for the creation of low-income housing.The program collaborates with the Malden redevelopment authority. Chair Puleo welcomed Mr. Koretz to the Board. • Election of Officers \ Nomination and Vote for Vice Chair Item tabled until Old/New Business portion of the meeting. Approval of Minutes August 7,2014 Special Meeting Minutes Minor edits were made to page six of the minutes, under"Board Discussion"of the agenda item to discuss the addition of a "Brewery, Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room" use to the NRCC District. Motion and Vote:Dale Yale made a motion to approve the revised August 7, 2014 minutes,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0)opposed, Mr. Koretz abstained. Regular Agenda Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET(Map 26, Lots 91,95&97) Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit.Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch.91 License issued by the MA Dept. • r City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 Page 2 of 12 • of Environmental Protection.The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Documents and Exhibitions: Chair Puleo read into the record a request submitted by Attorney Scott Grover, representative of the applicant,with a request to continue to the September 18, 2014 meeting. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to continue the public hearing to September 18,2014, seconded by Kirt Reider. The vote was unanimous with nine 19)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides Ms. Vale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Koretz, and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34, Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area, LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed- use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure,associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. • Documents and Exhibitions: • Petition and attached materials date-stamped July 10,2014 • "Washington at Dodge Development Proposal"slide presentation dated Sep 4,2014 Matthew Picarsic, Managing Principal for RCG, LLC(developer) presented for the applicant. Other presenters included: • David Giangrande, PE, MS; President, Design Consultants Inc., 120 Middlesex Avenue, Somerville, MA(civil engineering and land surveying) • Matt Zelkowitz, IALD, LC; Principal,Available Light, 10 Derby Square,Salem MA. Mr. Picarsic opened the presentation.The proponent has been working on the project for about 18 months. He invited questions from Board members and noted a larger contingent of the development team was present in the audience and available as needed. He summarized the project goals and scope of the project for the benefit of the Board. Project Goals: • Expand the downtown;this project is sited on the southernmost block of the B5 zone • Increase number of downtown residents • Improve the pedestrian environment Current"Base Program" Approximately: 190,000 square foot mixed used development on 1.S acres of land 111 room hotel 81 apartments • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 • Page 3 of 12 3 live/work units 14,000 square feet of retail space 6,000 square feet of additional commercial space Parking structure with at least 245 spaces Applicant has spent about 9 months working with the Salem Redevelopment Authority and the Design Review Board, resulting in significant changes to the architecture and plan. He reminded the Board the current surface parking lot(38 spaces)adjacent Washington Street was sold to the developer at market value;with the understanding the developer would make an equivalent number of parking spaces available for general public use.This sale of city property was authorized by vote of the City Council. Mr. Picarsic's presentation was organized to"walk"the Board around the site using renderings and drawings to enable visualization. Key plan components such as utilities, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment,etc.were discussed multiple times in conjunction with each plan detail and/or view as the presentation continued following the perimeter of the site. Site Location&Context: Mr. Picarsic reviewed a map of the area and pointed out the location of the parcel and noted the surrounding buildings and streets. He stated the Historical Commission has issued a waiver of demolition delay for the buildings on the site. He pointed out the following key aspects of the site plan • and inherent features of the site: • Site grade changes across the expanse of the site • Proposed hotel to be located along Dodge Street,currently referred to as the North Building o Hotel Lobby Corner at Dodge Street/Dodge Street Court o Drop-off treatment along Dodge Street Court • South and West buildings are mixed use. • Outdoor seating with space for tenant restaurant at street level • Wide sidewalks to encourage pedestrian traffic; bump-outs to improve pedestrian access to street crossing(slow vehicular traffic). • Two lower levels of parking structure accessed from Dodge Street Court • Upper level (open air parking)accessed from Washington Street Board Questions: • The Board asked if the proponent has a hotel partner. Mr. Picarsic replied yes,a hotel management partner has been identified but a formal agreement is not in place.They are currently reviewing franchise options for branding. He also indicated the PUD application has a fall-back plan to utilize the hotel space for more commercial/retail or even residential.Specifics will be offered later in the presentation. • The Board asked if the outdoor seating/restaurant is part of the hotel or an independent restaurant. Mr. Picarsic advised the goal is to have an independent restaurant.There is a planned breakfast room within the hotel. • The Board asked for rendering/perspectives of the view corridor down Washington Street that shows the difference between the existing view and the view with the proposed development. • City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 4, 2014 Page 4 of 12 • Presentation Continuation: Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation by introducing the open air stair connector.This provides a link from Washington Street to the garage/open air parking court.The connector provides light and separates the hotel building from the"cube"commercial/residential building.The change in exterior materials denotes change in use. • West facade: planned 2 levels of retail/commercial.Second floor of this building is accessed via stairwell in the west lobby and via the garage behind the building.There could be one or multiple tenants on this second level of the west building.The first level is at grade with the southern end of Washington Street. • Separate residential and commercial lobbies.There is a separate elevator to access commercial space. • Proposing to move curb lines as Mill St curves into Washington Street.Suggesting going from 3 to 2 lanes on this block of Washington Street(between Dodge Street and Mill Street/Washington Street intersection).On-street parallel parking recommended. • West end building will be first floor/second floor retail or commercial;could be either.The exact mix will be market driven. • The Board asked how pedestrians will know the commercial lobby entrance provides access to second level businesses. Mr. Picarsic advised the Design Review Board has discouraged too much signage on the exterior,so the architects are currently working on this issue. • South Building: Have significant grade changes. o first floor live/work units o the plan deals with grade changes using multiple sets of steps in an attractive, modern • townhouse style with strong vertical lines and a high level of landscaping. • Open-air Parking Court: 0 53 spaces including the 38 publicly available spaces required by the City for purchase of the space. o RCG will regulate these spaces, not the city. May be privately metered or operated as a pay to park lot. Board indicated the parking management plan will be critical in determining traffic flow within the site and the neighborhood. Mr. Picarsic advised the parking management plan is not firm at this time;and will be dependent on the actual types of commercial/retail tenants, and the final mix of commercial, residential, and hotel use. o Parking for residential units will be in the upper level garage(not open-air court) 1.5 spaces per unit minimum. The Board indicated a firm interest in understanding the management of the 38 spaces available to the public, and to the development's parking management plan as a whole. It is their responsibility to understand how the development fits into the entire neighborhood,including traffic flow. • Engineering highlights: o A portion of the northern edge of the site is in the newly expanded FEMA flood zone. o Base elevation of the hotel has been raised above the flood elevation.All critical mechanical systems will be located above the flood elevation. o Existing parcel does not have a lot of existing utilities—surrounding public property/streets have significant underground utility services.Quite a bit of infrastructure will be relocated: city sewer,water main, Nation Grid gas,electrical distribution and transmission lines and phone lines. • City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–September 4, 2014 • Page 5 of 12 • Overall Traffic&Parking Changes proposed in collaboration with city proposed traffic changes at this intersection. o Realign Dodge Street and straighten out the current jog—make it a true city street complete with crosswalks. o Add traffic control at Dodge St/Dodge Street Court with raised crosswalks to calm traffic on Dodge Street. o Changes to vehicular curbing to assist pedestrians around the entire perimeter of the site. o Dodge Street Court;Suggest changing the direction to one-way from New Derby to Dodge Street(currently 2-way vehicular traffic) o Dodge Street;Suggest elimination of parallel parking on north side, retain 2-way vehicular traffic and parallel parking on the south side. • Bike Lane Discussion:The Board asked if bike lanes are proposed for Dodge Street or Dodge Street Court. Mr. Picarsic replied there is not enough space.The Board noted bike racks are planned;the objective of city is to improve and add bike lanes. o David Giangrande, Design Consultants Inc.,advised the minimum standard is 4-feet. The plan does provide a 5-foot buffer along Washington Street to facilitate bike travel. Dodge Street is too narrow to accommodate a bike lane in addition to ADA accessible sidewalks, parking and 2-way traffic. Mr. Picarsic advised the City has a plan to improve the Mill Street/Washington Street/Canal Street • intersection. The AECOM plans for these improvements are referenced on RCG plans and renderings for this project. Based on these plans the proponent proposes to: • Bump-out the curb turning right from south Washington Street northbound onto Washington Street.This will slow traffic,shorten the pedestrian crossing distance,and make pedestrians more visible to oncoming traffic. • The plan effectively narrows Washington Street from Mill Street northbound to the Dodge Street intersection. Washington Street from Dodge Street to New Derby would remain the same allowing the current right-turn queue lane. • The plan adds a pedestrian crossing over Washington Street into Riley Plaza from the north side of Dodge Street. • Realign the curb cut into the site from Washington Street with Pond Street on the opposite side of Washington Street. • Overall,from Washington Street to Dodge Street Court,street improvements are planned in conjunction with utilities relocation and construction of this development. Board Discussion regarding proposed roadway/intersection changes: • Some Board members expressed concern about narrowing the Washington Street corridor between Mill and New Derby Streets. Many people need those 2 blocks to figure out which of the 4 lanes heading into the Norman Street/New Derby Street intersection they should be in— reducing the distance to only one block to decide does not provide enough time/room and could promote accidents or more congestion. • Other Board members pointed out that narrowing this block of Washington Street will make it easier for vehicles to maneuver from south Washington Street around the curve and into the left lane of Washington Street northbound,to follow Rt 114 Westbound down Norman Street. • 0 Throttling down Washington Street will slow down traffic which is a good thing. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 Page 6 of 12 • • Creation of a "buffer strip" between the proposed on-street parallel parking and the two traffic lanes on Washington Street could provide more space for cyclists, but will it be confusing to only have it for one block? • Board opinion was generally positive toward the proposed change on Dodge Street Court(one- way southbound vs.the current two-way).This represents an improvement and works with the current diagonal parking on Dodge Street Court. Additional Board Questions: • Are the trees shown on the surface parking court in planters or at-grade?Mr. Picarsic advised they are raised in planter boxes. He also notes the plan is to remove a few existing trees but the landscape plan provides for extensive tree planting to complement the pedestrian routes. He also volunteered that appropriate public art installations are planned for strategic locations around the site. • Mr. Picarsic noted there is an exterior lighting plan.The Board asked if a photometric plan is available at this time; if not, please provide at the next presentation. In addition to a more detailed presentation of the lighting plan,the Board is interested to know the impact of the lighting plan with regard to: o spill over onto adjacent properties o concern over halo effect from over-lighting o type of light fixtures The Board noted 80%of light fixtures in the renderings are modern and in keeping with building design. Some fixtures are faux historical and not in keeping with the other proposed fixtures. In • some instances,these are matching the City's street lights. Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation with some details of parking: • Lower level garage will be accessed from Dodge Street court.This level will be used by hotel guests;the entrance is located near the hotel drop-off area. It will likely be managed via an automated gate/ticket system. Configuration: 2 handicapped 12 compact 87 full sized 101 total The Board asked what the plans are for security in the garage, particularly this level. Mr. Picarsic indicated they will likely use cameras.The Board encouraged the proponent to consider crime prevention throughout the development, and particularly in the garage.The Board asked if security details will be provided; currently the proponent does not have this level of detail for a security plan. • In response to a request for clarification from the Board, Mr. Picarsic summarized access to various levels of the parking structure: Lower level of the garage accessed from Dodge Street Court Upper level of garage accessed from a second Dodge Street Court entrance Open-air parking court accessed from Washington Street only A total of 202 spaces will be entering/exiting via Dodge Street Court. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 • Page 7 of 12 • Provision for hotel deliveries will likely be made on Dodge Street and the north end of the parking court.The Board asked to know the width of Dodge Street Court to confirm the space is adequate for the planned activities. Mr. Picarsic advised the street width is 22-feet curb-to-curb. • The Board specifically requested the proponent confirm lighting at the end of Dodge Street Court will not be less than what is currently available.The Board is concerned to preserve security for neighbors adjacent the site and tenants. • Upper Level Garage is expected to include assigned spaces for residential units. Configured: 2 handicapped 12 compact 87 full size Total 101 Bike storage, recycling • Open-air Parking Court will include spaces for public use (replacements for the 38 spaces in the lot previously owned by the city).Other uses for the open-air court include: Considering Zip cars Snow storage • Board suggestion of electric car charging station • Changes in on-street parking: Combined net change is minus 2 parking spaces—detailed drawing identifying each space change. Proponent is adding loading spaces and taking away parking spaces. • Some loading areas are time-restricted,so they could be used for parking spaces outside of the loading zone times. Board discussion indicated a general concern regarding the spaces on the open-air parking court.The proponent is requesting flexibility on how this area is managed, and the Board is seeking confirmation these spaces will truly be accessible to the public and a replacement for the spaces on the land sold by the City.The Board requested planning staff to provide clarification regarding the exact terms of the sale with regard to providing replacement parking and managing it. Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation by noting that trash and recycling stations are noted on the site plan: Lower level garage station will service the hotel/north building Dodge Street Court station will service the first levels of the West/South Buildings The Board asked if the landscape plan includes public barrels for trash/recycling?Mr.Picarsic replied yes. ZONING REVIEW Mr. Picarsic summarized the zoning request and indicated the development meets all requirements: • PUD(planned unit development) requested • 3 parcels, entirely within B5 zoning district • Exceeds minimum requirement for the site to be 10,0000 square feet • Mixed use program In response to a Board question, Mr. Picarsic indicated the water table is 5 feet below lowest grade on • the site;the garage will be waterproofed construction. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 Page 8 of 12 • Building Height Calculations are a challenge due to the changes in grade across the site. Note that figures presented are averages—on some portions of the site building heights exceed these figures: • North building 65 feet average • South/west=69.5 ft overall average • 10'difference in elevation across the site The Board requested the next presentation show renderings with adjacent buildings to illustrate height both abutting and all the way to Bridge Street and along Dodge Street. Mr. Picarsic continued the presentation with a summary of the possible project program use configurations: Min.Parking Residential Commercial SF Spaces(Min. Hotel Units(incl. (Pedestrian grade Overall SF Publicly Program Description Roams Live-work) retail) Floor Area Available Example A Base program 111 84 20,000+/-(14,000) 190,000+/- 245 38 Smaller hotel Example B rooms and 120 90 20,000+/-(14,000) 190,000+/- 245 (38) dwelling units No hotel, Example C conversion to 0 145 28,000+/-(22,000) 190,000+/- 245 (38) retail/residential Conversion of • Example D Resi floor to 120 70 35,000+/-(14,000) 190,000+/- 245 (38) commercial No hotel and Example E conversion of 0 129 45,000+/-(22,000) 190,000+/- 245 (38) Resi Floor to commercial The Board noted the request for approval is for a very broad mix of uses. Chair Puleo asked planning staff to work with the City Planner for a directive on figures that should trigger a substantial change in use.The proponent indicated their preference is to not be required to return to the Planning Board for approvals related to the potential use changes.They propose that the parameters given above define an "insignificant change"to program use. Board Discussion: No precedent for such broad approval, consult with City Planner.Generally, Board members expressed concern that the public is entitled to know what to expect and a broadly defined program use is not helpful to the City and other stakeholders in the downtown.This is a significant parcel size in the downtown and changes in the mix of residential/hotel or in the mix of commercial to residential/hotel significantly impact City services,traffic and neighbors. The Board commended the proponent for looking beyond the lot lines to consider streetscape,curb cuts,etc.The Board requests for the next presentation include: • HVAC for each of these buildings, roof equipment. • Exhaust vents in relation to adjacent property • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 • Page 9 of 12 • Shadow study because they will be one of the taller buildings downtown • Size of the parking stalls— including all variations that exist • More consideration of speed tables for traffic management • Tree species need to be detailed • Parking garage signage in all the renderings appears too prominent, please present alternatives • Pavement detail • Perspective of snow storage has an odd sign, please clarify and reconsider how to designate the area. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: • Josh Turiel 238 Lafayette Street,Salem;Ward 5 Councilor. Disclosed he worked for consulting firm Available Light who is working on this project.Overall very impressed by the overall design and the direction this project is moving.Stated he is enthusiastic to see something unique and different in terms of design. Regarding the scope of approval requested by the proponent, he supports some flexibility to allow fine-tuning the mix of hotel rooms vs. residential units. He agrees a large change should require Planning Board approval; such as all hotel rooms to all residential,etc). More than 20 rooms/units in one direction or the other are significant. He also supports most of the proposed traffic changes. Believes this will trigger more pedestrian traffic that will overflow to upper Washington Street. In his opinion one of the biggest traffic concerns is the gridlock in Riley Plaza—he offered the opinion this project and proposed road changes will not significantly impact the gridlock either way.The spaces sold by the City were not highly • utilized. It was made clear during the sale process that once sold,the City has no further say in how the spaces are used or managed. City Council did hope the parking court would be used primarily by people using retail/restaurant businesses in the new development. • David Eppley 69 Boston Street,Salem;Ward 4 Councilor. Indicated he is thrilled to see these plans.Wanted to underscore the need to provide a good definition of substantial change; it should redirect the proponent to the Planning Board for approval. In his opinion, if there is not a hotel that is a significant change and the project should return to the Planning Board for presentation of alternatives. • Jim Kearney, 1%:Cambridge Street,Salem; Starbucks and other neighbors will not welcome loss of on-street parking on Dodge Street and Dodge Street Court. Other businesses on upper Washington Street will be negatively affected by the proposed loss of on-street parking. • Hank Deschamps,owner of Deschamps Printing Company Inc., 3 Dodge Street,Salem; abutter. Concerned about loss of parking spaces. His business has 18 employees.They rent spaces from RCG that will no longer be available when this project begins. Additionally he is seriously concerned about the access for daily deliveries to his business.The proposed changes adjacent to the intersection of Dodge Street/Dodge Street Court could make it impossible for tractor- trailers to make daily paper deliveries. Currently tractor-trailers enter via New Derby St or Lafayette.The Board asked if his deliveries are time sensitive—yes usually mornings for tractor- trailer deliveries, but box truck work could be any time. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 Page 10 of 12 • The Board suggested the proponent please show turning radiuses on the next plan revision.The Board also encouraged the proponent to consider how they will accommodate any other businesses who currently rent parking in this parcel. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to continue the Public hearing to September 18, 2014, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms.Sides, Ms. Vale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Koretz, and Mr. Veno)and none(0) opposed. Old/New Business • Board Nomination and Vote for the Planning Board representative to the Complete Streets Working Group. Board Discussion Several Board members encouraged Randy Clarke to accept the nomination due to his expertise and interest in multi-modal transportation issues.When asked, Ms. Menon confirmed the commitment includes a monthly meeting;the structure of the work group is unknown but includes appropriate city staff from a range of departments as well as individuals from various Boards/Commissions. Collectively the Board reached consensus and formalized the appointment. Motion and Vote:Helen Sides made a motion to appoint Randy Clarke to the role of Planning Board representative to the Complete Streets Working Group, seconded by Kirt Reider. The vote was • unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0)opposed. • Continued Board discussion regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture","Hens","Run","Coop","Livestock", and"Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by-right in RC, R1,R2, R3,81, 82,84,BS,I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses.This Board discussion is open to the public,but is not a Public Hearing. Board Discussion: Chair Puleo confirmed the members had reviewed the collected data on practices in five different communities: Boston, Marblehead, Ipswich, Peabody and Reading. Data included copies of ordinances, Health Department regulations and other documents depending on how each community chose to address the matter. Ms. Menon distributed a summary of feedback from some of the communities regarding their "lessons learned"and experiences to date. Board comment on the research to date: • Annual licensure renewal is a good way to manage compliance for those grandfathered in. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 • Page 11 of 12 • People felt setbacks in Peabody are fair.Variation based on lot size seems to help.The Board was especially interested in the details of the Peabody requirements: o Lots under 10,000 square feet,a maximum of 6 hens, with pens/runs kept a minimum of 5 feet from the property line o Lots from 10,000—21,000 square feet,a maximum of 15 hens,with pens/runs kept a minimum of 10 feet from the property line o Regardless of lot size, pens/runs must be a minimum of 15 feet from the dwelling of an abutter. o Coop space must allow a minimum of 2 square feet per hen and 1 nest box per 3 hens. o Runs must allow a minimum of 4 square feet per hen. o Coops or pens shall not be larger than 120 square feet. o Coops and runs shall not be located in the front yard or a side yard that abuts a public street. • Peabody philosophy is to grant permits;they will not deny based on 'possibility' but will revoke if problems arise.This seems to be a fair approach. • Different setbacks for runs vs.coops offered in one community seemed to be a good idea. • The Board re-iterated their philosophy that the Salem ordinance should be broad, primarily based on setback definitions,enabling the regulation to be provided by the experts in the Health Department. • Most communities cap the number of chickens allowed. • Chair clarified that no recommendation is required of the Planning Board at tonight's meeting.The joint public hearing is still open and will continue on September 11.The Planning Board should be prepared to make recommendation at its September 18th meeting; incorporating input from the public hearing on September 111"and possibly some response from the Board of Health regarding the draft regulations. • Nomination and Vote for Vice Chair Chair Puleo opened the floor for nominations and discussion.The Board asked for a recap of member seniority: Helen Sides Randy Clarke Kirt Reider and Ben Anderson appointed at the same time Collectively the Board reached consensus and formalized the appointment. Motion and Vote: Matt Veno made a motion to appoint Ben Anderson to the role of Vice Chair for the Planning Board,seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Koretz, and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. • Salem State traffic negatively impacting Loring Avenue A Board member inquired about the best purview to raise concerns regarding the increase in traffic problems on Loring Avenue due to Salem State traffic. Other members noted there is no local review process as they are a state entity. Recommended concerned parties approach the Salem State • Neighborhood Advisory Committee. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—September 4, 2014 Page 12 of 12 • Adjournment Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to adjourn the meeting,seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset, Mr. Koretz, and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 9:49pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 9/18/2014 • • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board �1��Y11 Date E3 / --I- / 2a L 4 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email 110A � 111 A(�c� 17�L-'��dL �7 �CS4�lC[�E72-Ce�GI-K/4r�.NZ' J M CILO.vl�-S St qV-5gL1 9�- My) 7o�7 k�aol[O m ivy c�a lv;ti I �l 778 7() 3&rs Rwl� Ir�ll,�«cs ��9 ►J.NnMN 51. MICA& -tom 9?'8 S39-So98 �w�ll�wwtC�ws•���►`�-•rs.a,, ;2 -ivy Pale of �T L CITY OF SALEM • PLANNING BOARD 11114 AUG .q P 27U9 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold a special meeting on Thursday,August 7th,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 314. 120 Washington St., Salem, AM Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. ELECTION OF OFFICERS • Nomination and Vote for Vice Chair III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES •July 29,2014 Meeting Minutes (joint public meeting with City Council) •July 17,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular meeting) • April 16,2014 Meeting Minutes (joint public meeting with City Council) • IV. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments" (Map 16, Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Continuation of the discussion and vote on an after-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specifically to allow after-the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans,was to be integrated into the new development. Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments"(Map 16,Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Discussion and vote on a request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Pemut to allow the realignment of the multiuse pathway,use of erosion-resistant materials along the slope above the existing canal wall, and related modifications to the plantings in these areas. Location: 1,3& 5 Harmony Grove Road,60&64 Grove Street—"Legacy Park Apartments"(Map 16, Lots 236,237,239,377&378) Applicant: MRM Project Management,LLC Description: A request to allow the extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six (6) months. 1 of2This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on AUG 0 4 2014 ata0 I/N1 in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for August 7,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • V. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses—NRCC District under Section 8.4.5 to add"3.5 Brewery,Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room"use, to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. • Discussion regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens",`Run","Coop", "Livestock",and"Customary agricultural,horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use, to be allowed by-right in RC,R1,R2,R3,B1,B2,B4,B5,I, and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. VI. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rigbts under the Open Meeting Lw M.G.L c. 30A 518-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 through f 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 W W W.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 S):P I I P I 56 FILE # September 11, 2014 CITY CLERK, SALEM,MASS, MRM Project Management, LLC C/o Joseph Correnti, Esq. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: 1, 3 & 5 Harmony Grove Road, 60& 64 Grove Street—"Legacy Park Apartments"(Map 16, Lots 236, 237,239, 377& 378) Decision of Planning Board to grant request for extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six(6) months. The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday,August 7, 2014 to discuss your request for the approval of an request for extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six (6)months. A letter submitted by Attorney Joseph Correnti, on behalf of MRM Project Management, LLC, on July 17, 2014,requests allowance to extend the permits granted by the Planning Board in a Decision date- stamped October 26, 2012, for an additional period of six (6)months. The petitioner states that the additional time is necessary in order to resolve a Department of Environmental Protection Appeal of the Conservation Commission Order of Conditions, which is holding up other state permitting needed for the project to begin. The requested six-month extension would commence on October 26,2014, which is the expiration date of the current Decision. The requested extension would expire on April 26, 2014. The Planning Board voted six (6) in favor(Mr. Puleo—Chair, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed, to grant the approval of the Insignificant Change request, approving the requested six-month extension of the Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions date October 26, 2012. This determination shall become part of the record for this project If you require further information,please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning& Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Charles Puleo, Chairman Salem Planning Board • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 1 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 1 of 9 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,August 7,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,August 7,2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:10 pm. Roll Call Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Dale Yale, Randy Clarke, Bill Griset and Matthew Veno .Absent: Kirt Rieder, Helen Sides and Noah Koretz. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner,and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Election of Officers Nomination and Vote for Vice Chair The item was tabled until next meeting scheduled September 4, 2014. Approval of Minutes July 29,2014 Meeting Minutes(joint public meeting with City Council) No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. • Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the July 29, 2014 minutes, seconded by Dale Vale. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor and none(0)opposed. July 17,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular) No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote:Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the July 17, 2014 minutes,seconded by Matt Veno. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor and none 0 opposed. April 16, 2014 Meeting Minutes(joint public meeting with City Council) No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote:Rand Clarke made a motion to approve the April 16 2014 minutes seconded b Bill V pp p V Griset. The vote was unanimous with five(5)in favor, none(0)opposed and 1 abstainina(Chuck Puleo). Regular Agenda Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments"(Map 16, Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Continuation of the discussion and vote on an after-the-fact request to allow an • insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 2 of 9 Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor • Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit.Specifically to allow after-the- fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding, which according to the approved plans, was to be integrated into the new development. Documents and Exhibitions: Plans titled"North River Condominium"dated Nov 15,2006 Plan titled"Site Improvement Plan"dated May 13,2013 Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented for the applicant. Other presenters included: Architect Thomas Galvin,JD LaGrasse&Associates;Andover, MA Atty Correnti advised the presentation was to provide more detailed background of what was originally approved by the Planning Board in 2006 and the evolution of the project. Mr. Galvin described the differences in the plan as approved by the Planning Board, dated November 15, 2006, and the current site plan as built. He reminded the Board the amenities planned for the original structure were ultimately incorporated into the built plan.The built plan also reduces the overall project footprint and provides more green space and permeable surface. Atty Correnti advised there was an error on the part of the developer in failing to return to the Planning Board for approval to demolish the original brick outbuilding. He recounted the steps that led to this action: • • The original wooden structure was deemed historically significant, not the brick add-on structure.The Historical Commission and Historic Salem Inc(HSI). Both organizations participated in discussions as early as 2003 about saving the original wooden structure.A study was conducted to examine the viability of saving this structure.The Historical Commission issued a demolition delay waiver for a portion of the building that was extremely deteriorated, leaving an L-shaped structure(issued 8/13/2004). • After further review,the L-leg was deemed non-salvageable and the Historical Commision issued a second demolition delay waiver to demolish this section as well (issued 11/4/2004). • After further review, it was established that it was not feasible to save the remainder of the building, and a third demolition delay waiver was issued by the Historical Commission,which authorized demolition of all remaining structures on the site (issued 4/21/2005). • The developer tried to save the 3-walled brick structure that still remained (although they had been permitted by the Historical Commission to demolish it),and it was included on the site plans approved by the Planning Board. Eventually it was determined that this remaining partial structure had deteriorated too much and it was demolished under the'authority of the third permit issued by the Historical Commission. Board Discussion: The Board clarified that all parties had originally intended to save any historically significant portions of the building and exhausted all efforts to do so before demolition.Atty Correnti confirmed this citing the three separate demolition permits sought and obtained from the Historical Commission. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 3 of 9 • The Board explored the process breakdown among city departments and authorizing boards; Ms. Menon reported the results of the internal research. Plans submitted to the Building Department were different than plans approved by the Planning Board. The Clerk of the Works is not tasked with reviewing the building footprint. They focus on construction work related to the public right-of-way and civil engineering elements. The plan package required by the Building Department for a Building Permit contains different kinds of information from what is approved by the Planning Board, as the Building Department requires building details,while the Planning Board focuses on design and site layout. Moving forward,the Planning Department will review the Site Plan sheet(s)submitted to the Building Department for a Building Permit,and it will be the Planning Department's responsibility to confirm consistency between the Planning Board approved plans and the Building Permit plans. Actionable Item: the Board requested the City draft a formal procedure to synchronize site plans and building department plans. Board noted the proponent brought to the Board's attention the error that had been made, and the City has acknowledged there was an internal error with a failure to reconcile plans approved by the Planning Board and the Building Department. Next steps: the proponent must submit a new plan for Planning Board approval that matches the built plan. • Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the after-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change in plan,seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments"(Map 16,Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal, LLC Description: Discussion and vote on a request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit to allow the realignment of the multiuse pathway, use of erosion-resistant materials along the slope above the existing canal wall, and related modifications to the plantings in these areas. Documents and Exhibitions: C3.0"Site Improvement Plan"dated May 13,2013 -revised July 24,2014 C2.0"Landscaping Plan"dated May 13, 2013 -revised July 24,2014 Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented for the applicant. • Other presenters included: City of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 4 of 9 Architect Thomas Galvin,JD LaGrasse &Associates;Andover, MA • Civil Engineer Rich Williams,Williams&Sparages LLC; 189 North Main Street, Middleton, MA Atty Correnti advised the proponent has not taken any physical action on the site, but currently has a contractor on hold awaiting Planning Board Approval. Mr. Galvin presented the proposed change to the multiuse pathway. Originally the pathway was planned at elevation 9 and the parking lot at elevation 10. In response to Conservation Commission comments,the grading was revised to direct runoff from the multiuse pathway into the drainage structures in the parking lot.To achieve this,the elevation of the multiuse pathway had to be raised, which increased grade of the slope between the multiuse pathway and the top of the canal wall. The presentation included photos of a high tide/heavy rain condition last winter that showed water cresting over the canal retaining wall. The proponent proposes riprap to retain the steep slope between the multiuse pathway and the canal wall, and prevent erosion of the slope. Plantings originally proposed for the steeper sections of this slope will be relocated to the slope areas with a shallower grade. Board Discussion: Board clarified that the pathway now directs runoff back to the parking lot. Atty Correnti noted the Conservation Commission has already approved this as a minor change. Mr. Williams addressed the size of the riprap stones which is currently under discussion. He advised that • the Army Corp of Engineers has a standard riprap size chart for slope/velocities, in this case the minimum recommended size is 3-inch diameter stone.The proponent is recommending 12-inch diameter stones,with the voids in-filled with smaller stones. 24-inch diameter stones will not fit in the smaller portions of the space.A filter barrier will go under the riprap to suppress weeds.Stone will be 12 inches deep. The Board suggested the plant species be adjusted to those capable of withstanding short-term inundation due to brief flooding, and that the riprap proposed represented a downgrade to the overall landscape plan. Mr.Williams stated the proposed riprap does allow for infiltration.The riprap will be positioned below the decorative fence along the edge of the multiuse pathway.The riprap swath varies in width from 2.5 feet to 1-foot and back to 2.5 feet as it curves around the site.The existing canal wall width varies as well from 28—36 inches. The Board clarified that the top of the canal wall and the riprap barrier are not accessible by the public, as confirmed by Mr. Williams. Motion and Vote: _Ben Anderson made a motion approved the decision on an insignificant change C2.0 (Landscaping Plan revised July 24, 2014)and C1.0(Site Improvement Plan revised July 24,2014)to a previously approved Site Plan Review, seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page S of 9 Location: 1,3&5 Harmony Grove Road,60&64 Grove Street "Legacy Park Apartments" (Map 16, Lots 236,237,239,377&378) Applicant: MRM Project Management, LLC Description: A request to allow the extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six(6) months. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented the petition. Atty Correnti summarized the history of the project to date. It has been two years since it was approved by the Planning Board. Delays have been due to a complex approval process and the appeal of an Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Commission.This appeal is ongoing with DEP. • The MEPA certificate and other state permits cannot be issued while the DEP appeal is pending. • A Chapter 91 license application modification needs to be filed but cannot be done while the DEP appeal is pending. • The proponent is requesting the statutory 6-month extension to preserve all the work done to date by the community and the developers. • This project falls outside the dates of legislative acts that would have allowed for an automatic 6-month extension. • Board Discussion: The Board inquired about the status of the ownership;Atty Correnti acknowledged MRM Project Management, LLC is currently in Chapter 11 re-organization. He advised this project is an asset and it is very important to keep the project alive and these permits in place.The original building partner is out of the project and developers are looking for a new building partner. The Board asked if the proponent expects these issues to be resolved within the 6-month period,or will the proponent return for another extension?Atty Correnti advised the proponent cannot continue indefinitely with the project in limbo.They are in discussions with the DEP to reach a resolution and may be before the Planning Board soon to request changes to the plan. DEP has suggested some changes to the plan may help reach resolution and those issues are being looked at by engineers. Possible changes relate to wetlands issues. Atty Correnti advised the Board that this is their first request for an extension;The extension would start on October 26, 2014,when the current decision expires. If the extension is granted, it would push the new expiration date to April 26, 2014. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the extension of the Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six(6)months, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 6 of 9 • Old/New Business Discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses—NRCC District under Section 8.4.5 to add"3.5 Brewery,Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room"use,to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. Board Discussion: It was an administrative oversight to not have included the NRCC district in the original proposed zoning amendment regarding the addition of a "Brewery, Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room" use. This amendment seems pretty straight-forward. Motion and Vote: Matt Veno made a motion to recommend the City Council amend the use table to allow"3.5 Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with Tasting Room"use byspecial permit in the NRCCzoning district,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Discussion regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for "Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run", "Coop", "Livestock", and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations" under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by- right in RC, R1, R2, R3, B7, B2, B4, B5, I,and BPD zones; and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" • under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. Board Discussion: Ms. Menon updated the Board on research since the July 29th public hearing and spoke to several of the key issues that seemed to arise from the hearing: • Consideration of which zones allow the use by-right; in drafting the proposed ordinance the tannin department recognized exceptions will occur in most or all zones. It is the view of the planning P g P department that specific requirements such as setbacks and distance from the dwelling structures would provide better regulation and more flexibility rather than prohibiting a use across the entire zone. NRCC is the only zone not included by-right due to oversight when drafting the original public announcements for the proposed change to the ordinance. During discussion,the Board members reviewed public comment(hearing and written submissions), raised additional questions and offered individual opinions in relation to the proposed ordinance: • Multi-family buildings would require owner approval. If an owner approved all hens for all tenants in a building how would this affect abutters? • Appropriate setbacks and lot sizes are a significant and difficult issue. • Board of Health draft regulations were comprehensive and covered most issues of concern. It was noted that at this time they are draft only and have not been approved by the Board of Health. • City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–August 7, 2014 Page 7 of 9 • o Chair Puleo reminded the Board that it is not their role to discuss Board of Health regulations needed to manage the ordinance. • Regardless of the ordinance, owners will be able to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals(ZBA)for relief from dimensional requirements if they have exceptional conditions; noting the ZBA already has in place a thorough notice process to enable all affected parties to present their views. • Some Board members stated that the proposed ordinance is too restrictive and will produce many appeals, and expressed the view that if an owner has a small lot but neighbors have given written approval and Board of Health conditions are met,then hens should be allowed. • The Board members generally agreed that neighborhood/abutter buy-in is critical. • Some Board members offered the view that zoning ordinances are meant to outlive any individual owners. Let people appeal to the ZBA. Good regulation protects new abutters and preserves the long-term purpose of zoning. • The Board agreed slaughter is necessary to cull the flock but reached no opinion on where the slaughter could occur(onsite outside, onsite inside the home, offsite). Some Board members are opposed to backyard slaughter in an urban setting, citing wild animals and disease concerns as well as the pressures of a densely packed community. • The Board was in general agreement that roosters should be specifically prohibited. • Is the zoning ordinance intended for property owners or tenants?As currently drafted, either could apply but property owner must provide documented approval on behalf of requesting tenants. • Ms. Menon noted that light ordinance restrictions will reduce neighbor/abutter involvement, as • the Zoning Board of Appeals provides an opportunity for abutter/neighborhood weigh-in.She encouraged the Board to set the regulatory threshold at an appropriate level to trigger an adequate level of public process. • The Board considered that state regulations requires a submitted poultry plan which could provide most regulation—and then concluded it is valuable to minimize situations where the city building inspector is required to interpret state regulations which can be cumbersome. There is merit to giving authority to the professionals(health and building inspectors) but it is important to provide them with clear guidelines and minimize ambiguity in the code. • Could people who currently have hens be grandfathered in for zoning purposes?As it stands now, yes,they'd be grandfathered in for the zoning code,but they would have to come into compliance with the Board of Health regulations. • Several Board members noted that the presence of a fence seems to be a significant factor in quality of life for abutters/neighbors and their willingness to accept hens as neighbors. Perhaps setback distances should vary depending on the presence of a fence(and its type). Input gathered from city departments regarding questions raised at the joint public hearing with City Council: • Larry Ramdin (health department): o Not in favor of allowing mobile coops because each new location would require recertification from the health department to confirm setback and other requirements are still met. o If the owner of a leased property wants to keep chickens on that property,they need 0 permission from the leasee/resident approve it. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 8 of 9 o Need definition for slaughter,the broadest would be appropriate. Health concerns • regarding disposal of the carcass, etc. • The question raised at the public hearing with regard to mixed use or two adjacent zones is currently addressed in the zoning code so there is no need to also address it in this ordinance. • Maximum height of a coop was set to match the maximum 6-foot fence height currently in the zoning code. • Determining adequate and appropriate setbacks seems to be the controversial aspect of the issue. o Ms. Menon offered to send examples from other cities. No city allows them in front yards or corner side yards.Somerville is 3-feet from side or rear lot line (their standard for regular accessory buildings). Boston is 5-feet from property line and 15-feet from structures. Peabody requires a setback of 15-feet.The Planning staff looked at a variety of examples, but left the final determination largely to health and building departments in drafting the setback recommendation. The Board requested additional information from city staff: o Please provide a summary of the research done on other community practices including copies of ordinances. Somerville and Cambridge practices are of particular interest. o Please poll other cities and request any hen coop census data they have,complaints, etc.;with special attention to how they address onsite slaughter and roosters. Please ask how long have their ordinances been in effect and what lessons learned can they share. If there is any data on how many coops currently exist in Salem it would be helpful. • o Please identify any cities discovered in the course of research that regulate and manage only through the Board of Health(versus zoning ordinance). • The Board explored whether an ordinance was even necessary, are we trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist? Ms. Menon explained the specific issue of hens has come before the ZBA twice thus far;there was a sense among city staff that this is a growing issue and it was time to address it. Bees were not specifically address because they have not come up as an issue at this point.There are cities that regulate and manage this through the Board of Health. • There was incidental, undetailed mention of adding ducks to the ordinance. This issue remains open. The Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and the Planning Board was opened on July 29`h. Evidence was heard,and the public hearing was continued to September 11,2014. After the public hearing is closed,the Planning Board has 21 days to respond. Planning Board Administrative Matters: • Ms. Menon wants to use Dropbox rather than sending email with multiple attachments.This will provide secure,online storage of documents for members. • Board members liked the online polling tool used to set this meeting date and encouraged its use when appropriate and it provides more efficiency and visibility to all members. • Appreciation for Tim Ready should be added to the next meeting agenda. Chair Puleo opened the meeting to the public for general input: is City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—August 7, 2014 Page 9 of 9 • • Jim Treadwell of 36 Felt Street;asked for clarification of agenda terminology, as "discussion"on the agenda does not mean open to public comment. Chair Puleo advised the Planning Board is always open to written comment from the public. "Public hearing" on the agenda indicates there will be a formal period when comments from the public are welcome. The Board agreed to modify future agendas and postings to `Board Discussion and Vote"to indicate an item is not taking public comment during the meeting. Mr.Treadwell offered his opinion regarding the MRM Project Management project, stating that the Conservation Commission work on the project was inadequate with regards to the wetlands legislation, which required the Department of Environmental Protection to address the omissions.The incomplete work by the Conservation Commission contributed to the delay that the project is now experiencing. Adjournment Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adiourn the meeting,seconded by Bill Griset. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Griset and Mr. Venal and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 9:00pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 9/4/2014 • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 OCT - I P r 11 October 1, 2014—Correction to September 11, 2014 letter FILE #1 P PITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. MRM Project Management, LLC C/o Joseph Correnti, Esq. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: 1, 3 & 5 Harmony Grove Road, 60 & 64 Grove Street—"Legacy Park Apartments" (Map 16, Lots 236, 237, 239, 377 & 378) CORRECTED Decision of Planning Board to grant request for extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six (6) months. The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, August 7, 2014 to discuss your request for the approval of an request for extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six (6) months. A letter submitted by Attorney Joseph Correnti, on behalf of MRM Project Management, LLC, on July 17, 2014,requests allowance to extend the permits granted by the Planning Board in a Decision date- stamped October 26, 2012, for an additional period of six(6)months. The petitioner states that the additional time is necessary in order to resolve a Department of Environmental Protection Appeal of the Conservation Commission Order of Conditions, which is holding up other state permitting needed for the project to begin. The requested six-month extension would commence on October 26, 2014, which is the expiration date of the current Decision. The requested extension would expire on April 26, 2015. The Planning Board voted six (6) in favor(Mr. Puleo—Chair, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed, to grant the approval of the requested six-month extension of the Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decisions date October 26, 2012. This determination shall become part of the record for this project If you require further information, please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning& Community Development at (978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Nw-&b ),�" /D5� Charles Puleo, Chairman • Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk 40P CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 SEP I I P 3: 5l FILE # VTY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. September 11, 2014 North River Canal, LLC C/o Joseph Con•enti, Esq. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: 28 Goodhue Street(Map 16, Lot 372),North River Apartments, Site Plan Review, Wetland and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit Decision of Planning Board to grant Request for Insignificant Change to alignment of multiuse pathway, use of erosion-resistant materials along the slope above the canal wall, and related modifications to plantings in these areas. The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, August 7, 2014 to discuss your request for the approval of an Insignificant Change to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Wetland and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit, to allow the realignment of the multiuse pathway, use of erosion-resistant materials along the slope above the existing canal wall, and related modifications to the plantings in these areas. A letter submitted by Thomas Galvin of JD LaGrasse & Associates, Inc. on July 24, 2014, states that the re-grading of the multiuse pathway requested by the Conservation Commission resulted in a steeper slope between the pathway and the top of the canal wall. Portions of this slope will be subject to seasonal flooding. The flooding in combination with the steep slope would erode any soil or mulch in the area, and damage plantings. As a result, the petitioner requests approval to use rip rap along this sloped area, and to move the pathway at the east of the property to be farther from the canal wall, in order to reduce the slope between the pathway and the canal. The plantings originally proposed for the length of the slope between the pathway and the canal would be relocated to this area. The petitioner submitted photos of past seasonal flooding, the proposed rip rap material, and revised plans "Site Improvement Plan" sheet C1.0 and"Landscaping Plans" Sheet C2.0 dated May 13, 2013 revised July 24, 2014. The Board requested that salt-tolerant plantings be used in the sloped area at the east end of the site, noting that the plantings may be subject to seasonal flooding. The Planning Board voted six(6) in favor(Mr. Puleo—Chair, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed, to grant the approval of the Insignificant Change request, approving the realignment of the multiuse pathway, use of rip rap along the slope above the existing canal wall, and related modifications to plantings in these areas, as shown on the"Site Improvement • Plan" (sheet C1.0)and the "Landscaping Plan" (sheet C2.0) dated May 13, 2013 and revised July 24, 2014. This determination shall become part of the record for this project If you require further information, please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning& Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely CharQ, y� k �n les Puleo, Cham an Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk i -2- VI Grp v 5A{ ? lee ?ft_rnt ..._._.,—._........�....._..r....�A..4..�......,..y..._ .. a-_.r�.. ..... .—...r.. ww v.nn.., n.. re..,. rdkn9E #rf 4(_�_ ZL _.�....�_ i i x�' w_.� �_ ._.,.__ /.„.�+?��" _r iia�':'___._._.__✓�?Ir?2�G�1��<: �� �_� ? °'� , _._ t t � WL�Sar .cf �kY _SAY `�{? Al .! I -f�.Y_rIL,:-(_.:�9-0`;�tR:Tv't�__P' tt20_Ef f'rc*HGrt+ L..(ameK..tn._�.�`aaCzryt -. H u 4 (tY. i c ...........y. ----------- ---------- _ _. ._ _ a x I } € • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board wn\y 1 190c/' Date Name Mailing Address Phone # Email 9 // `� ¢sal ��� r:��" �ci-✓/atm j Z k qn-W;-frocs �Ovy (jA.S /&1G�N 5-77 q,79-9` Y-64 Ito ca" M, ?It,AIR., 1,7 (v17 gas 83�s KKA,(Z WN6i (AIAC D -, C) r. I Page of t CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 JUL 2R p NOTICE OF MEETINGFILE # CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,July 31, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, AM Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA—2nd REVISION I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES •July 17,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular meeting) • April 16,2014 Meeting Minutes (joint public meeting with City Council) III. REGULAR AGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street—"Riverview Place" (Map 26,Lots 91,95 &97) Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC • Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Cb. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. NOTE:Applicant has requested to continue to the September 4th regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments"(Map 16, Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Continuation of the discussion and vote on an after-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specifically to allow after-the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans,was to be integrated into the new development. Location: 28 Goodhue Street—"North River Apartments"(Map 16.Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Discussion and vote on a request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit to allow the realignment of the multiuse pathway, use of • 1 of 2 City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for July 31,2014 Meeting—2,d REVISION Page 2 of 2 • erosion-resistant materials along the slope above the existing canal wall, and related modifications to the plantings in these areas. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219& 231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403,0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Location: 1,3&5 Harmony Grove Road,60&64 Grove Street—"Legacy Park Apartments" (Map 16, Lots 236,237, 239,377&378) Applicant: MRM Project Management,LLC Description: A request to allow the extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six (6) months. IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses—NRCC District under • Section 8.4.5 to add"3.5 Brewery,Distillery, or Winery with Tasting Room"use, to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture","Hens", "Run","Coop","Livestock",and"Customary agricultural,horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10; to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use,to be allowed by-right in RC,R1,R2, R3,B1,B2,B4,B5, I, and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. V. ADJOURNMENT ICnowyaur rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A§ 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through,1P 2-2033. This notice posted on "O ' ial Iletin o1�rd" City all, Salem, Mass. on at nI ifV�n accordant X;'t ap. 30A, Sections -25. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM T 3 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,July 31, 2014 at 7:OOpm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair REVISED MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES "< � a • July 17,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular meeting) • April 16,2014 Meeting Minutes (joint public meeting with City Council�x' r�- u,� N III. REGULARAGENDA m rr Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street- "Riverview PlaceZ o (Map 26,Lots 91, 95&97) m Applicant: Riverview Place,LLC `_j • Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Pemtit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch.91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 28 Goodhue Street- "North River Apartments" (Map 16,Lot 372) Applicant: North River Canal,LLC Description: Continuation of the discussion and vote on an after-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specificallyto allow after-the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans,was to be integrated into the new development. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403, 0405&0406) Applicant: Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Pemrit,and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, • associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. 1 of 2 City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for July 31,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • Location: 1,3&5 Harmony Grove Road, 60&64 Grove Street— "Legacy Park Apartments" (Map 16,Lots 236,237,239, 377&378) Applicant: MRM Project Management,LLC Description: A request to allow the extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six(6) months. IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion&vote on a recorrunendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses —NRCC District under Section 8.4.5 to add"3.5 Brewery,Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room" use,to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the Caty of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run","Coop","Livestock", and"Customary agricultural,horticultural and floricultural operations"under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture"use,to be allowed by-right in RC,R1,R2, R3,B 1,B2,B4,B5,I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. • V. ADJOURNMENT Krvwycw ni&order ibe OpeneM"LawM.G.L. c 30A § 18-25 and City Ordiretmr§ 2-2028 tdma*§ 2-2033. ;a This notiro posted on "Ott,c I Bulletin Board" city vlafk, :'ale+n: Mass 'in �d51 �91/ at IQ.J7,9Mm accordanc wi GILC�hap. 30AI Sections 18-25. • :)O\\'ASF i`t G-i,ON STREET, SAL::;A11nSS:\CH ,SL,"I'S01970�O ' PI-IlitiE 9%$.6)Mf7);S 1'AX 9%6.i4!).04t)4 l'a VAv.SAL.Pd.00.%i s `per CITY OF SALEM • ` "`` PLANNING BOARD 1014 JUL 24 P 4: 08 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK,SaLrEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,July 31, 2014 at 7.0Opm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • July 17,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular meeting) III. REGULARAGENDA Location: 72 Flint Street and 67-71 Mason Street- "Riverview Place" (Map 26,Lots 91, 95&97) Applicant Riverview Place,LLC • Description: Continuation of the public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch.91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Location: 28 Goodhue Street- "North River Apartments" (Map 16,Lot 372) Applicant North River Canal,LLC Description: Continuation of the discussion and vote on an after-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mined Use District Special Permit. Specificallyto allow after-the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans,was to be integrated into the new development. Location: 9-11 Dodge Street,217-219&231-251 Washington Street (Map 34,Lots 0403, 0405&0406) Applicant Dodge Area,LLC Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review,a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Pen-nit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units,commercial space including a potential hotel,a parking structure, associated landscaping,and pedestrian and transportation improvements. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, SatwM Mass. on JUL 2 4 1014 at $0YrM in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. 1 City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for July 31, 2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • Location: 1, 3 &5 Harmony Grove Road,60&64 Grove Street- "Legacy Paris Apartments" (Map 16,Lots 236,237,239,377&378) Applicant: MRM Project Management,LLC Description: A request to allow the extension of the previously approved Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and Site Plan Review Decisions for an additional six(6) months. IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses -NROC District under Section 8.4.5 to add"3.5 Brewery,Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room"use,to be allowed by special pemut of the Planning Board in the NROC zoning district. • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run","Coop","Livestock",and"Customary agricultural,horticultural and floricultural operations" under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by-right in RC,Rl,R2, R3,B1,B2,B4,B5,I,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7"Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyaur n&wrier rhe OpenM"LawM.G.L. c 30A S 18-25 and City Otdimnre S 2-2028 dRmo S 2-2033. • ?0 ei.;, F n:,'ON SrRr rr. SAL.r:'0, MASSA"'.I1 USr.IT:S 01910 PHON 978-61M,685 Fkx )5a."Pio.04 A • ; CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ` 6 l a eg 91 FILE #f CITY CLERK SALEM, MkSS, Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of DODGE AREA, LLC. for a Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit for the property located at 9-11 Dodge St., 217-219 Washington St., and 231-251 Washington St. (Map 34, Lots 0403, 0405, and 0406). The application proposes to construct an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. The public hearing will be held on Thurs, July 31, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St, 3`d floor, room • 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Mass. General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`d Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: July 17 and July 24, 2014 This notice posted on "Ofri ' I Bulletin_ Boar" City Hall, Salem, Mass. o tJ �t at j,`L 2ffM in accord MSL Chap. 30A9 Sections 18-25. • Know Your Rights under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through 2-2033. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALFM.COM City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 1 of 8 City of Salem Planning Board &Salem City Council Meeting Minutes Monday,July 29,2014 A joint public hearing of the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council was held on Monday,June 36-2014 at 7:00 p.m. at City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. City Council President Bob McCarthy opened the meeting at 7:05pm. Roll Call Planning Board members present were: Chuck Puleo, Kirt Rieder, Dale Yale, Randy Clarke and Bill Griset. Absent: Ben Anderson,Tim Ready, Helen Sides and Matthew Veno. City Councillors present were: Robert McCarthy, President, William Legault, Elaine Milo,Arthur Sargent, Heather Famico, David Eppley,Josh Turiel, Beth Gerard and Joseph O'Keefe.Thomas Furey arrived in time for the second agenda item. Absent:Todd Siegel. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Chair Puleo introduced the members of the Planning Board in attendance. Agenda A joint public hearing with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table of Uses— NRCC District under Section 8.4.5 to add "3.5 Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with Tasting Room" use,to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. President McCarthy reminded everyone the City Council and Planning Board recently took up the matter of an ordinance amendment to allow tasting rooms at breweries,distilleries or wineries. Staff Planner Dana Menon explained it was an oversight the NRCC was not included in the previous public hearing on the proposed ordinance. This does not affect the previously agreed language in the draft ordinance that is going through the notice/approval process; this is simply adding the NRCC to the use table. In the NRCC zone the Planning Board is the special permit granting authority, so businesses seeking this permit would appear before the Planning Board. President McCarthy opened the hearing for public comment: Chris Loring, 19 Carlton Street, spoke in favor as the area has appropriate space for this type of business. Motion and Vote: CouncilorTuriel made a motion to close the public hearing The vote was unanimous with nine (9)in favor(Mr. Turiel Mr. LeGault Ms Milo Mr. Sargent Ms Famico Mr. Eppley Ms Gerrard and Mr. O'Keefe)and none (0)opposed. J City of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 2 of 8 Motion and Vote: Councilor Turiel made a motion to refer the matter to the Planning Board for their recommendation. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Turiel. Mr. LeGault, Ms. Milo, Mr. Sargent, Ms. Famico, Mr. Eppley, Ms. Gerrard and Mr. O'Keefe)and none (0)opposed. A joint public hearing with the City Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Urban Agriculture", "Hens", "Run", "Coop", "Livestock",and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations" under Section 10;to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Urban Agriculture" use,to be allowed by-right in RC, R1, R2, R3, Bl, 62, B4, B5,1,and BPD zones;and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture"under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. Ms. Menon presented an overview of the proposed ordinance, reviewed several municipalities including Somerville, Boston, Peabody, Ipswich and Marblehead for reference. Input from health department and zoning officer to develop the draft ordinance. Key concerns identified during discussion among the City Council and Planning Board: • The Board of Health will have oversight should any ordinance be passed. Ms. Menon explained a zoning ordinance modification is needed, to be supported by the Board of Health regulations (currently in draft). Specific questions based on the draft regulations should be addressed with the head of the health department. • The ordinance has been drafted "as of right"for every zone, not "by permit" in some zones. Ms. Menon explained the intent was to manage the issue by defining the parameters(Board of Health regulations, setbacks and other details in the ordinance). If the parameters are well- defined, the permitting process will be stream-lined. • Language might be tweaked to address concerns or clarifications: o Setbacks required at properties with no nearby buildings on adjacent lots. o use of mobile coops that chicken owners often move on a seasonal basis(versus fixed accessory structures). o Improve the definition of slaughtering(prohibited)versus culling the flock or death of a pet. o Section 1 language seems to be focused mostly on the keeping of chickens. Some councilors seemed to express interest in expanding the intent of the ordinance to cover: bee-keeping and rabbits. Other councilors believe the city should move forward for now on the issue of chickens,and add other creatures at a later date as each has its unique care requirements and possible impositions on abutters. o Important the language in section 1 defines the allowed purposes are for personal use and/or hobbyists. Bee-keeping for example can be a hobby. o Yearly inspections are very important and would like to see language in the ordinance that refers to inspections; further detailed in the regulations. o Several councilors acknowledged most chicken-owners(or would be owners) are"doing it right" and there was a desire to respect and protect their rights. Examples of"doing it right" included: • Initial and ongoing consultation with abutters and immediate neighborhood • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 3 of 8 • Sensitivity to scheduling when the chickens are allowed outside, placement of runs and coops. • Maintain high standards of cleanliness and proper disposal of waste. City Health Agent Mr. Larry Ramdin confirmed for the Council that he led the effort to draft the Board of Health proposed regulations. The Board of Health members are currently reviewing the draft, and will take up the issue at their next meeting in September. He clarified for the Council the draft regulations were provided to give context to the proposed ordinance, and to demonstrate how the proposed ordinance will likely be regulated. Any regulations will ultimately be revised and approved by the Board of Health under its direct authority. • In reply to a query, he stated if a resident currently has concerns about livestock; yes,they should contact the city Health Department. • During the process of developing the regulations for this proposed ordinance,the Board of Health will likely invite comment from the public as is their customary practice. • After new regulations are adopted, residents with concerns should contact the city Health Department. • At this time Mr. Ramdin declined to comment on specifics of the draft regulations as the Board of Health has not formally provided input or opinion. • The question was asked and answered in the affirmative;the Health Department may need at minimum one more staff member to regulate urban agriculture if this ordinance is passed. • Mr. Ramdin advised the sources he reviewed when drafting the regulations for Board of Health consideration included federal and state regulations with regard to: animal health, animal practices, animal husbandry,Council should rest assured no single city or source was used to draft the regulations to provide Salem with the best possible regulations. Regulations were drafted to address most situations, not single concerns. Additional key issues discussed by the Council and Planning Board: • What are the state inspection requirements, and do they supercede anything the city might put in place? Mr. Ramdin advised the state requires the local inspectors to maintain a log of their inspections. President McCarthy outlined the approval process the proposed ordinance follows: after the Public Hearing is closed, City Council will refer it to the Planning Board for recommendations;the matter will come back to City Council who may choose to adopt or send the matter to committee for further work. President McCarthy opened the hearing to the public; beginning with those speaking in favor of the ordinance or an aspect of it: • Kathy Karch; 76 Memorial Drive, spoke in favor of urban agriculture. Issue has the potential to positively impact our city: increase access to locally grown/nutritious food;family food budget supplement; educational opportunity for our children; decrease our carbon footprint. Suggestions for the draft ordinance: o Flesh out the definition of terms by adding: coldframe, aquaponics, roof farms, community farms, commercial farms,greenhouses, hydroponics. o Add keeping of bees and rabbits. City of Salem –Planning Board y Meeting Minutes–July 29, 2014 Page 4 of 8 o Section 3, 3.2.7 is too focused on the keeping of chickens; not enough of other aspects of urban agriculture. o Regulation of coops needs to be altered to be permitted in side yards; especially those that do not abut streets. Need to accommodate mobile coops. o Onsite slaughter must be permitted. o Front yard gardening of food and medicinal crops needs to be specifically allowed as it generates controversy. • CJ Karch; 76 Memorial Drive, Chicken owner,spoke in favor. Neighbors are supportive. • Naomi Cottrell, 55 Warren Street; spoke in favor. OK with chickens but believes the 15-foot setback is a critical necessity. Is a neighbor of chickens, has child with egg allergy. Has had egg debris on her property from the adjacent coop currently situated on the property line. Much of the egg debris carried over by vermin. • Patrick& Patty Scanlon 42 Dearborn Street; opposed to the trend of raising chickens on small backyard lots. Mr. Scanlon was previously chair of Salem Board of Health. used regulation 5 of health code to resolve an issue with chickens in south Salem. o Our homes are our largest investments—chickens cause odor, noise, etc. and negatively affect quality of life and property values. o Recognizes proliferation of urban chickens is a reality. New neighbors erected a coop. He was told by the city they have little recourse and was told to erect a fence. City departments did not offer much help. Neighbors kindly moved the chickens, but held open likelihood chickens might come back. o Similar issue on Orchid Street. They are disturbed the city would not support building inspector; "family pet" defies common sense and abutters were not given adequate consideration. o This issue needs to be handled more fairly with sound policy. Encouraged additional language to protect property owners on small lots—and city departments should be more responsive to abutters. Supports ordinance wants it strengthened to protect abutters and homeowners. • Lea Benson, 19 Pickman Street; spoke for modification of ordinance. Her family owned farm in Danvers and had their house in Salem for a reason (no chickens at the house). Encouraged the council to consider health and safety. Being green and sustainability is important. Introduction of a new animal into the Salem eco-system may have unintended consequences.Growing plants help the environment, keeping chickens does not. Chicken waste is filled with salmonella and poses a danger to immune-suppressed individuals.There is not enough distance (setbacks) in the ordinance. Consider what microbes will be introduced and the impact. Look at the data in cities/towns with chickens; is there an increase in disease? • Susan Patterson, 8 Barton Square; Spoke in favor. Requested the city be careful not to over- regulate. Her animal husbandry experience has been raising quail for release into the wild.Valid points about the need for setbacks and concern for microbes. She urged common sense. Expects to raise chickens someday, must be done "in the right manner" which cannot be legislated. • Michele Parr, 12 Verdon Street; spoke in favor. She raises chickens. Spoke with her neighbors from the beginning. Her children and their friends are getting a good educational experience. Has never had a problem. Be respectful of neighbors; it can be worked out. • Cady Goldfield, 37 Moffatt Road; spoke in favor. Recognize importance of working with neighbors.Agrees common sense is called for and encouraged the city not to over-regulate. y City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 5 of 8 o Asked if the yearly inspection by animal control officer(reports to state)would be redundant to Board of Health annual inspection. MDAR (MA department of Agricultural Resources)State requires local animal control agents to keep census on all livestock and report it to the state annually (barn book). o Local animal control conducts a thorough annual inspection. o State requires blood tests of poultry/fowls on a regular basis by a poultry inspector. Good way of ensuring compliance with care and cleanliness standards. She has been breeding and raising rare Bantam chickens for 45 years, and has lived in south Salem for 20 years with her flocks without incident.She has the express approval and consent of her neighbors. Backyard agriculture is not the same thing as hobbyists or pets. Her credentials include a degree from the Agricultural College of University of Rhode Island where she studied poultry science,game bird management, livestock husbandry and urban management. She offered her expertise to city boards and agencies. She teaches in the environmental horticultural program at North Shore Community College. • Geoffrey Millar, 20 Abbott Street; Has no chickens, or any interest in havig chickens. Spoke in favor. Believes his lot is too small for chickens with the conditions set out in the ordinance, and the parameters of the ordinance are a good thing. • Marcie Clawson 46 Dearborn Street; spoke in favor. Moved from R2 zone where she was"not allowed" but did have chickens with neighbors' support. She now lives in RI where her new neighbors are uncomfortable so she has moved her chickens to another location.Agreed setbacks needed. Disputes between neighbors are a problem—which brought us here. Living with neighbors and accepting differences is vital. Insecticides used by neighbors affect her crop gardening. • Jim Adams, 5 Manning Street; spoke in favor. 6-feet height on fence isrestrictive—should be 8- feet. He builds coops. Privacy fence (stockade) instead of chain link offers more protection to neighborhood. • Maura Murphy, 70 Dearborn Street; spoke in favor. She has chickens because of her child's interest. Please use common sense. Her neighbors are supportive and she is respectful of her neighbors. Members of the public speaking against the ordinance: • Kristen & Kevin Cordy, 1Orchard Terrace; spoke against.They are the property owners from the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing(regarding 69 Orchard Street).Thanked their councilor and others who have reached out to hear their concerns.Asked council to consider what happens when neighbors are not getting along and not in agreement.They are now in legal proceedings with their neighbor over this issue. Grievances and comments include: o Neighbor's chicken run now abuts the property line.The coop itself is 5-15 feet from the property line. o They are constantly aggrieved by chicken by-products and noise. Cannot open the windows in their home as they are subject to debris; and cannot utilize backyard. Poultry dust creates serious health problems for her husband—this is not visible to the eye but penetrates the lungs. o Room for improvements to ordinance language: • Definition of"customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations" needs work. What happens if primary use for pet and secondary for profit?ZBA Is uses broadest definition for defining pets (it only needs a name). City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–July 29, 2014 Page 6 of 8 • Ordinance solves one problem and makes another.As currently written, someone could build a goat or sheep house (accessory building) and as long as they consume 50%of the goat's milk,Salem Zoning Ordinance 3.2.1 will not apply. • Concerned about allowed.greenhouse heating plants for personal use (not financial gain) will be allowed closer to the property line than on commercial property. • Will hens be allowed to breed via rented rooster services? Need to tighten the language to prohibit on-site killing. Slaughter is defined as killing for meat; ordinance does not prohibit killing for other purposes (religious, humane culling). Will abutters be expected to witness killing for other purposes? • Setbacks-15 ft is not sufficient.There are abutters who complained about noise at Zoning Board of Appeals. Need increase in setbacks to a range that is documented to be sufficient(not anecdotal). In their direct experience, 15 feet from the property line is not enough. • Storage of poultry dust/manure? • What about abutters who don't have fences to demarcate property lines?Are they expected to erect a fence to protect themselves? • How will noise nuisance be defined and enforced?A dog that barks all day is easier for an animal control officer to witness. • Is it reasonable that the only recourse for abutters is to sue in district court? Additional discussion by the Council and Planning Board: • Some Councilors expressed concern about allowing the ordinance "by right" across all zones; citing examples of types of residential properties that could pose problems such as multi-family buildings, apartment houses and residences located over retail space. o Other Councillors and city staff advised these locations would likely disqualify due to: • Owner of the building does not provide approval (required) • Setback requirements. o Non-conforming residential lots could keep chickens if they met all other requirements. • Planning Board member Bill Griset offered that raising chickens on a small scale has a place but it may not be consistent with an urban setting. He is supportive of green, sustainability,farm-to- table, etc. but cited the coyote frequently seen in the Willows neighborhood–drawn in part by chickens. Is this good for our children and family pets?This is a balance issue. Not sure chickens belong in urban setting. Raising chickens is not a right of citizenship. • Planning Board member Randy Clarke sees the coyote regularly too. He is favorably inclined to the proposed ordinance and respects rights of property owners. He stated setbacks are an issue that needs careful consideration. • Councillor O'Keefe expressed concern about allowing chickens in B1 zoning and does not think apartments/multi family should have chickens. • Councillor LeGault doesn't believe owners of these properties will allow chickens and added they generally won't meet setback requirements. No need to over complicate the issue or over- regulate. • Councillor Turiel offered we can look to the experience of other communities; and see that chickens and urban agriculture is feasible and of interest to many citizens.Just because a location meets physical limitations doesn't mean it is appropriate. Need to focus on the process City of Salem —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 7 of 8 for approval to provide flexibility.Spoke against defining by zone,owner permission should be adequate to control. • Councillor Eppley believes a critical issue will be health department regulations—more so than the ordinance. He observed the proposed permitting process provides for a public hearing (and abutter notification). Board of Health can deny a permit. • Planning Board member Kirt Reider advised setback parameters must be quantifiable and measureable as this is critical for ordinance language and regulation. Diversion of drainage is important—setback distance is not the only issue. Planning Board Chair Puleo suggested the public hearing stay open to allow more time for the Planning Board to work.They are not comfortable voting so soon (July 31)with only five members, and with so many questions still on the table. More time would also provide City Council and Planning Board with the benefit of Board of Health action on the draft regulations.The Planning Board can discuss the matter publicly at their regular meetings, but the discussion of the Planning Board on this matter is not a public hearing. As point of procedural clarification, City Clerk Cheryl Lapointe advised that once the joint public hearing is formally closed, if the item has been referred to the Planning Board they must respond within 21 days with a recommendation to City Council. If Council does not close the public hearing tonight they must set a date for the next public hearing. President McCarthy summarized issues for the Planning Board to consider: • table use is a big question. • when considering side and rear setbacks, lot size should be considered which will eliminate many lots. • Natural predator(coyote) concern is valid, particularly as these are currently protected animals that cannot be killed or trapped/relocated. President McCarthy recognized one more public comment: • Jenny Hobbs, 20 Southwick Street-the ordinance needs to address situations where the abutter and proponent are in two different but adjacent zoning districts. Motion and Vote: Councilor Eppley made a motion to continue the public hearing to the regular Citv Council Meeting on September 11, 2014. The vote was unanimous with ten (10)in favor(Mr. Turiel, Mr. LeGault, Ms. Milo, Mr.Sargent, Ms. Famico, Mr. Eppley, Ms. Gerrard, Mr. O'Keefe and Mr. Fury)and none(0)opposed. F I/New Business None Adjournment Motion and Vote: Councilor O'Keefe made a motion to adiourn the meeting. The vote was unanimous with ten (10)in favor(Mr. Turiel, Mr. LeGault, Ms. Milo, Mr. Sargent, Ms. Famico, Mr. Eppley, Ms. Gerrard, Mr. O'Keefe and Mr. Fury) and none(0) opposed. President McCarthy adjourned the meeting at 9:20pm. City of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 29, 2014 Page 8 of 8 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 8/7/2014 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD FILE: tt CITY CLEIK SALEM, t1ASS. City of Salem Notice Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and City Council July 29, 2014, 7:00 P.M. The Planning Board will hold ajoint public hearing with the City Council on Tues, July 29, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington St., Salem, MA for all persons interested in the amendment of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for "Urban Agricithare", "Hens" "Run" "Coop", "Livestock", and "Customary agricultural, horticultural and floricultural operations" under Section 10; to amend the Table q/ Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Urban Agriculture" use, to be allowed by-right in RC, R1, R2, R3, Bl, B2, B4, B5, 1, and BPD zones; and to add a Section 3.2.7 "Urban Agriculture" under Section 3.2 Accessory Uses. • A draft of the amended Ordinance is on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department of Planning& Community Development, -1 Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: 7/15/2014 and 7/22/2014 This notice posted on "Offi talulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on (-� 11b u Ably at ( q I � M in accord W' i MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. • 20 bV:�iruncr�m S'rar rr, S:�t.t v, MI\S,n ill si rrs 01970 • PHONE 975.619. 651 F:\x 97S.710.040,1 0 i CITY OF SALEM 1 9 `` PLANNING BOARD '"'4��6 19 P I FILE it CITY CLERK. SALEM, BASS. City of Salem Notice Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and City Council July 29, 2014, 7:00 P.M. The Planning Board will hold ajoint public hearing with the City Council on Tues, July 29, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington St., Salem, MA for all persons interested in the amendment of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to amend the Table qF Uses — NRCC District under Section 8.45 to add "3.5 Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with "Casting Room" use, to be allowed by special permit of the Planning Board in the NRCC zoning district. A draft of the amended Ordinance is on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department of Planning & Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Charles M. PUIe0, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: 7/15/2014 and 7/22/2014 This notice posted on "Offi al Bulletin Board" City. Nall. Salem, Mass. on I0 Ablq at �' Lt I (� fn in accordant wit 11A Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. 120 WVa wirrON SIRFH, xi.- ss,scrosFrrs 01970 • PuONF 9"13.6195685 F,sx 913.740.0404 mi .,A • � , CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD lUla JUL 15 A ci; 25 NOTICE OF MEETIN f I # �TY CLER}(. Sa�LEt1,t1k5S, You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,July 17,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair REVISED MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • June 16,2014 Meeting Minutes (joint public hearing with City Councill • June 19,2014 Meeting Minutes (regular meeting) III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408);25 PEABODY ST(Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST(Map 34,Lot 408) Project: A public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings,landscaping,and parking,primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET (Map 26,Lots 91,.95&97) Project: Request for release of Lots 2 and 4 from Covenant of the Definitive Subdivision Plan at 18 Thorndike Street Applicant: PATRICK DEIULIS Location: AUBON and THORNDIKE STREETS . This notice posted on "Offs 11 Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on 4.1 at q,`2,r /ON in accordanMSL Chap; 30A,Sections 18-25: t of 2 City of Salem Planning Board REVISED Agenda for July 17,2014 Meeting • Page 2 of 2 Project: After-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specifically to allow after- the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans, was to be integrated into the new development. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL,LLC Location: 28 GOODHUE STREET (Map 16,Lot 372) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knomyour rights under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L a 30A 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 W W W.SALEM.COM o t 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,July 17, 2014 at 7:00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, 414 n Charles M Puleo, C4air < o MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL rC— I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES n� • June 19, 2014 Meeting Minutes " 3 III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include • an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 446); 235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST- (Map 34,Lot 408); 25 PEABODY SP (Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUMTRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) Project: A public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision,North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping, and parking, primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the M11 Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) Project: Request for release of Lots 2 and 4 from Covenant of the Definitive Subdivision Plan at 18 Thorndike Street Applicant: PATRICK DEIULIS Location: HUBON AND THORNDIKE STREETS . This notice posted on "Offi 'al B Iletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass on U jOl dDl y at P(') in accordanc withAGL Chap. 30A, Sectig%T)18-25. City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for July 17,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 Project: After-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specifically to allow after- the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans, was to be integrated into the new development. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL,LLC Location: 28 GOODHUE STREET (Nlap 16,Lot 372) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT I noivyoerr rzghts under the Open Meeting L.a:v&I..G.L c. 30,115 18-25 and Czty Ordinance J 2-2028 through J 2-2033. • • 120 WASHINGTON StaEEr, SALEN1, MASSACf1l1SE-17S 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 W WW.SALEII.CON1 I� City of Salem — Meeting Sign-[n Sheet Board Date �- Name Mailing Address Phone # Email rk,d o �, ,. M\ o��R49— 197e�539 -�c�d8 cs ar sC��s�<< s, k l7 C. ?X 1 yS��G� T�$�NNc��Jcd2Cc�hr�r,. r eT �i,A 3579 —►awl �wl•Ik � ,,�// 2 rALOK) Va p 'L((::- -b-t 'IALaLlktose,v a 2,` 9 DoM Q7& 7 0716 al. rwq � Z.,I5 /c7�7V5/6�C�l vc�a�kfis vD (zuS ,Go Pale of CITY OF SALEM I�9• " PLANNING BOARD 2014 JUL - I P 0 4l FILE 4 CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of Riverview Place LLC for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision, North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the property located at 72 Flint St. and 67- 71 Mason St. (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97). Specifically, the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping, and parking, primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch. 91 License issued by the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection. The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. The public hearing will be held on Thurs, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington St., 3rd floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Dept. of Planning & Community Development, 3`d Floor, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA. Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: July 3 and July 10, 2014 This notice posted on "offici Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on at /Z'4 2 ?h in accordancIGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. Know Your Rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A f 18-25 and City Ordinance If 2-2028 throe8 h 2-2033. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEiNI, 1\/IASSACHUSETrS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • WMV.SALEM.CoM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 11114 JUL 23 P 12 38 PITY CLERK,SALEM MASS Notice of Decision At a meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, July 17, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at 120 Washington St.,Salem,MA, the Planning Board voted on the following items: A public hearing to consider the application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC for a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street, Congress Street Map 34, Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34, Lot 408; and the parking lot at 25 Peabody Street (B5). Specifically, the application proposes the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with a proposed new five-story hotel building with 42 hotel units, associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 25 Peabody Street. Decision: Approved Filed with the City Clerk on July 23, 2014 • This notice is being.cent in compliance with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Sections 9 & 15 and does not require action by the recipient.Appeals, if any, shall be made pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be filed within 20 days from the date which the decision was filed with the City Clerk. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. onJU4 � 01� at /CM/Ori in accordance wit hap. 30A, Sections 18-25. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • www.sALEM.com i W.WaterfrontHotel&Suites, LLC July 23,2014 Page 1 of 10 & CITY OF SALEM miU JUL 23 P rr<: 38 PLANNING BOARD FILE # CITY CLEPX SALEM, MASS. Site Plan Review, Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, and Planned Unit Development Special Permit Decision Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street; Congress Street Map 34, Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34, Lot 408, and 25 Peabody Street(1135). July 23, 2014 Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC C/o George W. Atkins III Ronan, Segal & Harrington 59 Federal St. Salem, MA 01970 • RE: Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC for a Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street; Congress Street Map 34,Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34,Lot 408, and 25 Peabody Street (B5)• On Thursday, February 20, 2014 the City of Salem Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 9.5 Site Plan Review, Section 7.3 Planned Unit Development, and Section 8.1 Flood Hazard Overlay District of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, at the request of The Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC, for the property located at 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street; Congress Street Map 34, Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34, Lot 408 (135); and the parking lots at 13-15 Herbert Street (R2) and 25 Peabody Street (135). Specifically, the application proposed the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. The Public Hearing was continued to April 3, 2014 (but was not heard on that date), April 17, 2014, May 1, 2014, May 15, 2014 (but was not heard on that date), May 29, 2014, June 5, 2014, June 19,2014 (but was not heard on that date), and July 17, 2014. The public hearing was closed on July 17, 2014. At the May 29, 2014 meeting, the applicant stated their intention to revise their application to: omit the • off-site parking lot at 13-15 Herbert Street, eliminate the proposed bridge connecting the existing hotel building to the proposed new hotel building, reduce the number of stories of the proposed new hotel 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - .www.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel& Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 2 of 10 building from six (6) to five (5), eliminate the 14 dwelling units originally proposed to be included in the • proposed new building, and add 10 hotel units to the proposed new building, for a total of 42 new hotel units. Revised drawings reflecting these changes were submitted at the June 5, 2014 meeting. In considering approval of the Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, the Planning Board hereby finds that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 8.1 Flood Hazard Overlay District, as follows: 1. The proposed uses comply in all respects to the uses and provisions of the underlying districts in which the land is located. The underlying district is B5, however, the provisions for Planned Unit Development Special Permits, as laid out in Section 7.3 of the Salem Zoning Code, allow the Planning Board to approve a project that is in "... compliance with the master plan and good zoning practices, while allowing certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of specific zone classifications. " 2. There are adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets and property, particularly in the event of flooding of the lot(s) or adjacent lot(s) caused by either overspill from water bodies or high runoff. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)for Essex County (Panel 419), the base food elevation is 10 feet. The project site is above this elevation. 3. Utilities, including gas, electricity, fuel, water and sewage disposal, shall be located and • constructed so as to protect against breaking, leaking, short-circuiting, grounding or igniting or any other damage due to flooding. The applicant will comply with State Building Code, including provisions of 780 CMR 120.G— Flood Resistant Construction. 4. Where the proposed use will be located within a coastal high hazard area(Zone VE on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps), the Planning Board shall also find the following conditions to be fulfilled: a. New structures or substantial improvements shall be located landward of the reach of mean high tide. b. The support of new structures or substantial improvements shall not be, in whole or in part, by the use of fill. N/A: There are no proposed uses within the VE zone as mapped by FEMA on the site. In considering approval of the Planned Unit Development Site Plan Review, the Planning Board hereby finds that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 7.3 Planned Unit Development, as follows: 1. The proposed planned unit development is in harmony with the purposes and intent of this Ordinance and the master plan of the City of Salem and that it will promote the purpose of this section. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - www.sALEM.com Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 3 of 10 • The proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD), which incorporates a mix of housing, commercial space and recreation space,promotes the purpose of Planned Unit Development, Section 7.3 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, and is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the master plan of the City of Salem. The 1996 City of Salem Master Plan Update specifically targets waterfront development: "Although Salem's historic prosperity derived from its waterfront location,for many decades the City tended to neglect its waterfront. Visual and physical access to the water is poor, especially downtown. Waterf tont development can link the City's tourist attractions, bringing economic benefits, while providing recreation for City residents. "(pp7-8). The Master Plan reiterates the importance of making aesthetic and recreational improvements to Salem's waterfront. The proposed hotel, restaurant, and function space included in this development will activate a waterf tont parcel that is currently mostly occupied by a parking area. Additionally, when this project receives its Chapter 91 License, completion of a public harborwalk along the waterfront of the project area will be required. The Master Plan also highlights Pickering Wharf as an economic development asset, and specifically identifies a lack of sufficient tourist lodging as negatively impacting tourist spending within Salem (p22). The development of a convention hotel is specifically listed in the Strategies for economic development (p25). 2. The mixture of uses in the planned unit development is determined to be sufficiently advantageous to tender it appropriate to depart from the normal requirements of the district. The mixture of uses in the planned unit development is sufficiently advantageous to render it appropriate to depart f rom the normal minimum distance between buildings and required number • of loading bays requirements of the B-5 (Central Development) district. The mixture of residential, commercial and recreational uses proposed is appropriate. 3. The planned unit development would not result in a net negative environmental impact. The Planned Unit Development.would not result in a net negative environmental impact. The project includes construction of anew building over a portion of an existing parking area. The water quality of the runoff f-om this area will be improved, as the runoff source will be from the proposed building's roof rather than from the existing area of parking lot. In addition, the redevelopment of the site includes improvements to stormwater management. This will result in net improvements to the natural environment on the site and surrounding it, including water quality in Salem Harbor. At the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on July 17, 2014, the Planning Board voted eight (8) in favor(Chuck Puleo, Dale Yale,Ben Anderson,Kirt Rieder, Tim Ready, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, and Bill Griset), and none (0)opposed, to approve the Site Plan Review application, the Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,and the Planned Unit Development Special Permit for the proposed new five-story hotel building with 42 hotel units, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the following plans: • "Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion"prepared by Symmes Maini &McKee Associates • (SMMA), 1000 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02138; James K. Emmanuel Associates, 22 Carlton Road, Marblehead, MA 01945; Patrowicz Land Development Engineering, 14 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 4 of 10 Brown St, Salem, MA 01970 - dated July 17, 2014, inclusive of sheets: "Site Plan Aerial • View", "Site Plan Existing Conditions", "Site Plan Locus: 40-Scale", "Site Plan PUD Site Area", "Site Plan Parking & Traffic Circulation", "Site Plan Layout Dimensions" "Site Plan Grading(earthwork)", "Site Plan Utilities", "Site Plan Notes& Details"and"Site Plan Details" dated 1/6/2014 and revised 6/28/2014; Sheet A-]Ola, A-102a, A-201, A-202;A-203, and A-204 dated 7/17/2014; Sheets L-1 and L-2 dated 7/17/2014; Sheets ES 110-112 dated 7/17/2014. 2. Required Revisions to the Plans The applicant shall submit to the City Planner, for review and approval, annotated plans specifying the locations of"one-way, do not enter" signs (or similar) at the exits and intersections of the ways proposed to be changed to one-way traffic within the site area. Sign locations shall be: • The eastern terminus (at Wharf Road/Union Street) of the proposed one-way east-bound hotel entry drive running from Congress Street to Wharf Road/Union Street. • The northern terminus (at Derby Street) of the proposed one-way north-bound hotel and condominium access drive, which runs north-south immediately behind (east of)the existing hotel building. These plans shall be approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a building permit for the new building proposed for the site. 3. Amendments Any insignificant changes 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. Construction Practices All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the following conditions: a. Exterior construction work shall not be conducted between the hours of 5:00 PM and 8:00 AM the following day on weekdays or at any time on Sundays or Holidays. Any interior work conducted during these times will not involve heavy machinery which could generate disturbing noises. b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. c. Drilling, blasting, and rock hammering shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM. There shall be no drilling, blasting, or rock hammering on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on surrounding roadways as they leave the site. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . www,sALEM.com . 4 Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 5 of 10 • e. 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. f All construction vehicles left overnight at the site, must be located completely on the site. g. A Construction Management Plan and Construction Schedule shall be submitted by the applicant. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, 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 reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. h. All sidewalks, roadways, utilities, landscaping, etc. damaged during construction shall be replaced or repaired to their pre-construction condition, or better. i. Applicant with its contractor to attend a pre-construction meeting with appropriate city departments. j. No Street shall be closed without prior approval of the City Planner,unless deemed an emergency by the Salem Police Department. . 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. 6. 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 certifies that soil and ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. c. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - \4WW.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel& Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 6 of 10 d. 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. e. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. f. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. g. 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. h. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for firefighting. i. 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. j. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. k. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in • an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health. 1. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. in. The developer shall install grease traps, to contain grease in gray water,prior to it entering the city sewer system in developments with 10 or more units and in compliance with the requirements of the City Engineer. n. Salem sits in a Radon Zone I and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely high. Therefore, the installation of radon mitigation systems is strongly recommended. 7. Utilities—Existing Storm Drain a. Upon completion of the site building demolition, the Applicant shall expose the existing drain, and the Applicant and City Engineer shall visually inspect the existing drain and its location. b. In the event the inspection determines that the proposed hotel is to be located above the existing drain, the Applicant shall prepare an engineered drain relocation plan, at no less than 1"=40' scale, with generally accepted utility construction industry standard information and details describing the proposed relocation, hereinafter referred to as the "Plan" for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Plan shall • describe how the Applicant will relocate the drain around the proposed hotel to Congress 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 7 of 10 • Street and how the drain line would be reconnected to the drain system in Congress Street by the City c. The Applicant's contractor shall construct the relocation of the pipe and extension through the sheet pile wall as described on the Plan. d. The Applicant shall provide the sum of$100,000.00 to the City as a contribution to City costs for reconnection of the drain pipe if necessary and any permitting and licensing requirements prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event, the cost to the City for the drain connection work is less than $100,000.00,the Applicant shall be reimbursed the difference. e. At the conclusion of construction, any portion of City drain (existing or relocated) on the Applicants property shall be described in an easement granted by the Applicant to the City, approved by the City Engineer and City Solicitor, not less than 15 feet wide, centered on the relocated drain, for future access, maintenance, and replace by the City. f. The City Engineer shall be responsible for seeking all permits and licenses required for the construction of the Plan, and the City shall act in a reasonable timeframe so as to not impede or delay Applicant's permitting and construction of the Hotel. 8. Department of Public Services • The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the Department of Public Services. 9. Parking a. The Applicant, its successors, and assigns shall exercise its options to extend the Lease Agreement with Massachusetts Electric Company, its successors, and assigns, for the use of the parking lot located at 25 Peabody Street, Salem, MA in its entirety,to provide parking for patrons of The Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, the associated restaurant and function halls, and marina users, for periods of five (5)years, through to March 31, 2030 without interruption, and shall provide documentation of such extension to the City Planner prior to the expiration of each intervening five (5) year Lease period. b. Prior to March 31, 2030, the Applicant, its successors, and assigns shall make all good-faith efforts to enter into an additional Lease period with the owners of 25 Peabody Street, Salem, MA for continued long-term use of the parking lot in the manner described above. Documentation of this effort shall be provided to the City Planner prior to March 31, 2030. Failure to pursue in earnest an additional Lease beyond March 31, 2030, shall require the Applicant, its successors, and assigns to appear before the Planning Board in order to appropriately address the parking demands of the Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, the associated restaurant and function halls, and the marina. c. There shall be no traffic blockade,temporary or permanent, erected between the Derby Street . parking lot entrance and the Congress Street exit drive north of the bank (currently Eastern Bank) for a"trial period" of six months. This trial period shall start after occupancy of the 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC ` July 23,2014 Page 8 of 10 new proposed building, and shall be conducted during the peak season for the hotel. If the • petitioner believes that the inability to erect a traffic blockade at this location creates a negative impact on the site and site users, and if the petitioner wishes to be able to erect a traffic blockade in the above-described area, the applicant shall appear before the Planning Board within or upon conclusion of the six-month "trial period"to present data and observations in support of their request. The Planning Board will then make a determination as to whether the petitioner shall be allowed to erect traffic blockades in that area in future. The Planning Board may require additional data and observations to be submitted prior to issuing their determination, if the Board feels that the information presented is incomplete. 10. Congress Street Crosswalk The Applicant agrees to contribute$15,000 toward the construction of a new crosswalk with ADA- compliant ramps on Congress Street, at a location to be finalized by the City Planner. Such payment shall be made to the City prior to issuance of a building permit for the construction of the new building proposed for the site. 11. Stormwater a. Prior to start of site activity, the applicant shall submit to the Conservation Commission an Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement per Standard 10 of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Checklist for Stormwater Report. b. All stockpiling of debris, fill and excavated material shall occur outside the resource areas and • buffer zones. This condition may be waived on a case by case basis upon written determination by the Conservation Agent that a stockpile area includes measures to adequately protect the resource areas or buffer zone. c. Below-grade excavation shall be limited to the minimum necessary to construct the building and related infrastructure. d. Any existing drainage components to be reused must be inspected prior to their reuse. e. Prior to start of construction of the new building, condition the drain line referenced as Item #5 in William Ross's June 27, 2014 peer review letter addressed to Dana Menon, shall be assessed. The condition of said drain line and a plan to address it shall be reported to the Conservation Agent. The Conservation Agent will determine whether work associated with this drain line requires further review by the Conservation Commission. f. The parking lot shall be cleaned with a street sweeper at least four times per year. i g. The work shall conform to the following plans: "SITE PLAN TO ACCOMPANY A NOTICE OF INTENT APPLICATION" (sheets 1 through 11), dated June 26, 2014, signed and stamped by Scott Ian Patrowicz, on file with the City of Salem Conservation Commission; "Stormwater Report" dated May 12, 2014, signed and stamped by Scott Ian Patrowicz, on file with the City of Salem Conservation Commission. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . www.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 9 of 10 12. Signage The proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved the City Planner and the Building Inspector prior to obtaining a Sign Permit. 13. Lighting a. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. b. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy. 14. HVAC All ITVAC units located on the roof of the proposed building or on the site shall be visually screened per the plans and details approved by the Planning Board. 15. Landscaping a. Trees shall be a minimum diameter of 3 %"dbh (diameter breast height). b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. • c. 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. d. The applicant shall contribute$5,000 to the City of Salem toward the purchase and installation of five (5) additional street trees along Congress Street and Derby Street adjacent to the project site, locations and species to be finalized by the City Planner and the City Tree Warden, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new building proposed for the site. 16.Maintenance a. Refuse removal, recycling, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. b. Maintenance of all 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- (2) year period, from issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. c. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. d. A plan for trash receptacle location and maintenance shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit. 17. As-built Plans 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC July 23,2014 Page 10 of 10 a. 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 any Certificate of Occupancy. b. 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 any Certificate of Occupancy. c. A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 18. Violations Violation 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 has been filed with the City Clerk and is 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 ora applicant, his successors or assigns, shall ay the fee for recording or registering. PP g P Charles M. Puleo Chairman 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 1 of 10 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,July 17,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,July 17, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor,at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:12 pm. Roll Call Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Dale Yale, Randy Clarke, Helen Sides, Bill Griset and Matthew Veno.Absent: None. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Approval of Minutes Jun 16,2014 Meeting Minutes(joint public hearing with City Council) No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Dale Yale made a motion to approve the minutes of June 16, 2014, seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0)opposed. Jun 19,2014 Meeting Minutes(regular) No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote:Bill Griset made a motion to approve the minutes of June 19,2014,seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor and none(0)opposed. Regular encla _ Project: A public hearing for an application for an Amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review decision, North River Canal Corridor District Special Permit,and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Specifically,the application proposes changes to the proposed buildings, landscaping,and parking, primarily in order to meet the requirements of the required Ch.91 License issued by the MA Dept.of Environmental Protection.The number of residential units and square footage of commercial space remains the same. Applicant: RIVERVIEW PLACE LLC Location: 72 FLINT STREET AND 67-71 MASON STREET(Map 26, Lots 91,95&97) Documents and Exhibitions: • Application date-stamped June 26, 2014 and accompanying materials • Revised plan set submitted at the meeting Atty Scott Grover of Tinti, Quinn, Grover& Frey, 27 Congress Street; presented for the applicant. Additional presenters included: • Jonathan Stone, O'Sullivan Architects, 580 Main St, Reading, MA; architect City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 1 ,. Page 2 of 10 • Chris Sparages,Williams&Sparages, 189 North Main Street, Middleton, MA; civil engineer • James Emmanuel,James K Emmanuel Associates, 22 Carlton Road, Marblehead, MA; landscape architect Atty Grover indicated that the overall footprints of the buildings have been reduced along with square footage of the residential areas. He provided an overview of the original plan approved in 2009.The original plan was extensively reviewed including peer reviews and Design Review Board input and a series of public hearings. The revised project now consists of: 130 residential apartment units Approximately 5,000 square feet of commercial space, 260 parking spaces for residential use (per North River Canal Corridor overlay district) 10 spaces for commercial use 12 spaces for Flint Street neighbors to alleviate some parking congestion Atty Grover described the proposed changes and context. After receiving previous local approvals,the state environmental approval process resulted in some required changes to the project: • 100-ft offset from the canal is required so one building had to be moved. • Chapter 91 license is required which prompted a MEPA review. MEPA required use of the 2013 Flood Plain Standards which prohibited residences on the ground floor for this parcel. Parking was substituted on the first floor instead of apartments for the building closest to the canal. • The original 37 parking spaces reserved for the 5500 sf of commercial was revised to 10 spaces. The original number of spaces anticipated possible retail use which is no longer the case. • Eliminated 1 level of the parking garage and reduced the height as a result of the reconfiguration. • Moved building#1 (as shown on plans) back to comply with 100-ft offset from the river. • Mason St building(#3 as shown on plans) is slightly smaller. Atty Grover reviewed the color-coded plans which contrast the location of original buildings,the original plan and currently proposed location of buildings. Architect Jonathan Stone continued the presentation with a more detailed review of the revised plan. No residences can be located on the flood plain (15`floor) so adjustments have been made to residential unit sizes.These changes enabled them to reduce the mass of the building if they also reconfigured parking. Now parking is distributed throughout the project and located closer to various user groups. The parking structure is now only 2 levels high. Site lines and access to the canal from the park above (Mack Park) remain the same. Mr. Stone reviewed renderings of the proposed building exteriors.The renderings compared what was originally approved with currently proposed minor changes. • Building 1 revives a traditional mill-building look with brick. 15`floor garage "windows" are shaped like upper floor windows and filled with grillwork. • Building 2 is designed with a mill-housing row-house look with fire-separation walls. • Building 3 is designed to complement the Mason Street residential look,with some use of brick. The commercial space is provided with a storefront look. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 3 of 10 The Board requested additional clarifications from the applicant's team: • Mr. Rieder explored the proposed fencing on top of walls over 4-feet exposed height. Civil engineer Chris Sparages explained these retaining walls are needed to support abutting properties that sit at a higher elevation,and that any retaining wall that is higher than 4-feet requires a fence on top of it per code. Mr. Rieder expressed concern they may be wrapping a private residence in some cases. • Mr. Anderson explored the 10-ft elevation drop from Mason Street down the entry drive and his concern about using this driveway in winter weather,and sufficient turning room at the bottom of the drive. Mr. Sparages clarified this is a 2-way driveway onto Flint St, but left-turn only.The slope is 10%; the previously approved plan was steeper.Aisles are 24-ft wide to support 2-way traffic. Corners are rounded to facilitate safe turning. • The Board asked for more detail on the lighting plan. Mr. Sparages advised the previously approved lighting will be switched to LED lighting.The applicant is sensitive to neighbors and has identified newly available fixtures with tilting heads.These enable a reduction in foot candles but maintain safety;their spillover needs to be researched.The Board encouraged the developer to consider full cutoff fixtures that eliminate spillover onto abutting properties. • The Board inquired if all residential units will be offered at full market rate.Atty Grover advised 10%of the units will be affordable housing as required. • The Board expressed some concern with the use of quick brick fa4ade in certain areas including the residences due to possible maintenance problems. Mr.Stone will provide a detail of how it is attached on the next plan revision. • The Board inquired about the dumpster location and details. Atty Grover advised the dumpsters have not been moved from the previously approved location.The proposal is still to provide fencing around the enclosure so the dumpsters are not visible. • The Board asked for site renderings in both directions to show building elevations relative to the rest of the site, and any proposed roof top utility structures.The concern is for neighbors at higher elevations around the site—what are they looking at on the roof tops? Please show at next presentation. • Several members of the Board expressed their appreciation for the thoughtfulness of the renderings by providing both existing residential photos and proposed renderings on the same plan. • The Board inquired if the proponent has engaged the neighbors on retaining walls/fencing and other common issues.Atty Grover advised they did originally and now will reach out to a new neighbor before the next meeting. • The Board explored the interface between the parking lot owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the applicant's property—what is the demarcation between the two properties(perpendicular to the river). Mr. Sparages advised there is a tree line and some chain link fencing owned by the state. Applicant indicated the state may require them to improve the access to the canal; they are awaiting Chapter 91 license instruction. Landers Symes of 50 Dodge Street, Beverly, offered that the State may require the developer to provide access from the State parking lot to the new canal walkway as there is now public access.The Planning Board encouraged the developer to work with the State on this boundary to prevent any"cow path" arising from foot traffic. Several members of the Board expressed concern that this corner is City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–July 17, 2014 -- Page 4 of 10 already a pedestrian problem and unattractive, and should be addressed with the re- development of this site in a manner that will improve aesthetics and pedestrian safety. • The Board inquired about the 30-ft wide roadway easement on the plan, and the proposed site design. Atty Grover explained that inclusion of the roadway easement was a condition of the original application approval,to align with the NRCC master plan. He doubts the city will actually seek this easement for a future road but did acknowledge the potential conflict. • The Board pointed out discrepancies in the proposed landscaping, particularly street trees, among the various plans, renderings and the landscape plan. Landscape architect James Emmanuel presented landscape plan and acknowledged the need to update all plan documents and ensure consistency. Same plant palette and sizes as previously approved; generally an increase in the number of plantings because there is more open space. Locations have shifted slightly but located similarly in relation to the buildings. Civil engineer Chris Sparages reviewed the storm drainage design.The design meets all required standards. Runoff will be collected in deep-sunk catch basins for pre-treatment of pavement runoff, then piped to a treatment device. Storm water is then discharged into the river via a one-way valve. Soils are characterized as poorly draining/poor infiltration so the drainage has been supplemented by bio-retention cells. The Board asked if the system will capture vehicle spills; Mr.Sparages confirmed yes,sumps inside catch basins will catch these spills. There is an operational maintenance plan for the storm water management systems including catch basins and Stormceptor units. The Board also asked about the grade difference between the waterfront path and the mean high water - is it enough to require a guard rail?The applicant stated that they are awaiting Chapter 91 instruction on the exact detail needed. Chairman puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: • Ken Wallace 172 Federal St. has a failed retaining wall behind his house that is now a problem in determining who is responsible for repairs. For this project,who would own the retaining walls and would be responsible for repairs?Atty Grover advised the retaining walls will be owned by applicant. Mr.Wallace also asked: if the storm water valve is shut at high tide, and a heavy rain occurs,where does the water go? Mr. Sparages explained that if pressure behind the valve is higher it will open.The system is designed for 7 inches of rain in 24 hours. Mr.Wallace asked about rains at the rate of one inch per hour—would it fail? Mr. Sparages replied the design meets DPS standards. • Andy Weinstein,owner of 38 Commercial Street, abutter by the Mason Street driveway; asked how pedestrian traffic from the new river walkway will be kept off his property.There is currently a problem with people cutting through. He is looking for landscaping or fencing. Atty Grover advised that the Chapter 91 review might discourage/disallow this.The approved plan does not include anything to inhibit cut-throughs. Mr.Weinstein observed the path of least resistance to get to the train station is to cut across his property. After exploring foot traffic options, the Board agreed with Mr.Weinstein that there is cause for concern and recommended City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 5 of 10 proponent and the abutterjointly develop a plan to address this. It may be appropriate to include the City in developing a solution. • Chair Puleo asked if the fence type for the dumpster area has been approved.Atty Grover replied yes,there are details per the proponent(stockade wood fence) that were submitted with the previous application.The Board would like to explore the durability of what is proposed, and requested that details be provided. • Jane Arlander, 93 Federal Street asked a series of questions that were answered by Mr.Stone: o What is the total residential square footage now? The previous proposal was 185,000- 186,000 square feet. Mr.Stone replies that it has been reduced to 159,540 square feet. o What is the average residential unit size now? Mr. Stone replies that it has been reduced to 650-987 square feet with two 3-bedroom units at 1200 square feet. o How many parking spaces now? 282 total, including 78 outdoor spaces. Previously the outdoor parking spaces totaled 39. o Where is snow storage planned onsite? Mr. Sparages advised there are several and demonstrated on drawings. Ms. Arlander is concerned about melt running into a couple of Flint Street abutting properties; some of them have swimming pools. Mr. Sparages advised the project site is 7-10 feet in elevation below those backyards. o What is the change in buffer zone?Atty Grover advised the Zoning Board of Appeals granted some relief;the parking is now setback 7-feet(at the closest point)from the property line. Ms. Arlander is concerned about headlights affecting neighbors. Mr. Sparages pointed out the difference in elevation will prevent the headlight bleed over. o Ms. Arlander expressed concern regarding the parking lot exit onto Flint Street and asked if there is still a proposed 1-way egress? Mr. Sparages replied yes, left-turn only. • Ken Wallace (172 Federal Street) followed up to ask if there will be an island to force a left-turn onto Flint Street and prevent a right turn? Mr.Sparages replied yes. • Nina Cohen, 22 Chestnut Street, asked if there is provision for bike parking. Mr. Stone advised there are covered spaces for an estimated 35-40 bikes. Ms. Cohen also observed that the Flint Street fencing is covered in poison ivy and badly maintained at present; requested the owner address as it is hazardous to pedestrians using the adjacent sidewalk. • Barbara Warren, 5 Hardy Street, Salem Sound Coastwatch Executive Director; suggested the developer approach the Commonwealth and request an easement to put a path through to the adjacent State owned parking lot. Ms.Warren asked if the parking garage is completely enclosed. Mr. Stone advised no. Ms.Warren asked about flooding in the garage. Mr. Sparages advised that as the garage floor drains are in a structure,they must be connected to the sewer system;there is no sump pump. Ms. Warren commented that if there is flooding enough to flood the parking lots the water may go into the sewers,which causes backups in our wastewater treatment networkk. Mr. Sparages stated this is a plumbing code requirement. Ms. Warren concurred and stated this is problem for the Cities of Salem and Peabody to address. Atty Grover informed the Board that the project will go to the Design Review Board on July 23rd. He is not sure whether they will be ready for the next Planning Board meeting on July 31". Ideally the project would have both the Design Review Board and Planning Board satisfied before they present for Chapter 91 licensure. The applicant and Planning Board generally agreed to schedule the project for the next Planning Board meeting and coordinate with the planning department staff. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 6 of 10 Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made o motion to continue the public hearing to July 31 2014,seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Project: Request for release of Lots 2 and 4 from Covenant of the Definitive Subdivision Plan at 18 Thorndike Street Applicant: PATRICK DEIULIS Location: HUBON and THORNDIKE STREETS Documents and Exhibitions: • Letter to the Board requesting release of lots 2 and 4,dated July 7, 2014 • Instrument of release for partial release of lots from covenant (for lots 2 and 4) Patrick Delulis provided an update on the project. Infrastructure is complete (water main, drain catch basin, etc.) excepting municipal services to the individual houses.Also remaining to be done is the binder/finish coat on the private way.There is a buyer who wants to purchase both lots and begin construction. Lots are prepared for foundations and the developer will complete the finish grade after the houses are constructed as part of the agreement with buyer.The applicant is not making a request for cash bond reduction at this time.All improvements have been put in place except for paving. Ms. Menon reported that the bond funds originally submitted by the applicant are still intact at $50,000. FST has reviewed the project and reported to the city confirming that this is a more than adequate amount to complete the required improvements. City Solicitor Beth Rennard has approved the draft lot release document. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the request for release of Lots 2 and 4 from Covenant of the Definitive Subdivision Plan at 18 Thorndike Street, seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none (0)opposed. Project: After-the-fact request to allow an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit. Specifically to allow after-the-fact the demolition of a brick outbuilding,which according to the approved plans,was to be integrated into the new development. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL,LLC Location: 28 GOODHUE STREET(Map 16, Lot 372) Documents and Exhibitions: • Letter to the Staff Planner requesting approval of insignificant change, dated July 10, 2014 • Plans approved by the Planning Board in 2007 • Construction Plans dated May 13, 2013 IS City of Salem—Planning Board ^.. Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 7 of 10 Thomas Galvin, architect,from JD LaGrasse &Associates,Andover, MA, presented. Mr. Galvin assured the Board the demolition of the building without appropriate approvals was unintentional and explained the sequence of events that led to the error.There was a long lag between purchase, plan and start of construction (2004—2013).The existing building was not a stable structure; it was razed because it did not impact the character of the new building and the program for the demolished space was addressed elsewhere in the development (a community space was planned). Reduced square footage of roof and added green space to the site as a result of the demolition are viewed as benefits to the project. Board Discussion: Chair Puleo stated he did not recall and research of the minutes did not indicate any lengthy discussion about preserving the building. He clarified with Mr. Galvin that the community space in the new building provides the same square footage as the razed building would have provided. Mr. Galvin also clarified the original intent was never for public use—only residents—which is how the current space is used. Chair Puleo noted the approved plan shows the structure as attached; the developer needs relief. The Board discussed the precedent this sets for future projects and a concern about how much time has passed without anyone calling the error to attention and seeking to address it. The Board agreed to reserve the right to require mitigation after the fact in this type of situation as a deterrent to future proponents and incentive to avoid this type of mistake. It was observed that the minutes relating to the project approval did not include discussion of preserving the building because there was no mention of demolition.The Board and the public could reasonably assume no discussion was needed as the building was shown on the plans. The Board concluded the Site Plan approval was not tied to submitted construction drawings. It is unknown if the building inspector or building department approved the demolition. Chair Puleo asked if a demolition permit was obtained, as an older structure like this would have required the historic commission to review and approve a demolition delay waiver. Mr. Galvin did not know these details. The general opinion among the Board is this would have been noted by the building inspector. When asked when the building was razed, Mr. Galvin advised the contractor mobilized in 2013. The Board is seriously concerned there was an error with the clerk of works. Most members were rather shocked the demolition was never noticed or called into question by either the developer (as this building was in the plans), the building contractor or by city departments. At this time it is unclear if the error was within the city departments or within the documents submitted by the proponent. The Board briefly discussed possible mitigation. The developer is already paying to realign the curbing in the area; there is an existing sidewalk that will also need to be realigned (near public storage property); there is a need to pour a new concrete sidewalk that will align with the new curbline. City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–July 17, 2014 . . Page 8 of 10 Mr. Griset recommended the Board delay mitigation discussions until the next meeting when more information is presented. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made o motion continue the discussion to July 31, 2014, seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Vale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno) and none (0)opposed. Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 489); 23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446; 235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions: • Compiled updated plans, dated July 17, 2014 • Draft special condition#7, updated July 17, 2014 • Draft decision and special conditions, updated July 17, 2014 Attorney George Atkins of Ronan, Segal & Harrington, 59 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Other presenters included: Tony Sasso, project manager,Salem Waterfront Hotel. Atty Atkins summarized the status of the outstanding issues that have been addressed since the applicant's last appearance before the Board. Only a couple of issues are still outstanding. • A draft decision has been circulated to the applicant and Board members. New language to replace paragraph 7—Utilities, was agreed to by the applicant. This special condition addresses the matter of the 36" drainage pipe believed to run underneath the existing marina building, and the responsibilities of the applicant and the City in regards to the exploration and potential relocation of this pipe. • The applicant will provide $15,000 for the city to build a crosswalk on Congress Street; location to be determined by the city. • The applicant will present a trash receptacle location and maintenance plan for approval by the city planner.This plan will also need to be approved for the Chapter 91 license. • The Board's concern about traffic flow through the site and how it impacts the immediate neighborhood has been reviewed extensively. The client continues to express concern about the safety factor within the project and the danger posed by cut-through traffic. City of Salem—Planning Board ., Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 Page 9 of 10 In particular, the change in traffic flow at the Congress Street south driveway from two-way to one-way inbound has been reconsidered in acknowledgement of the Board's expressed preference that this driveway remain two-way. Due to the physical limitations of the site and various setback requirements, only a one-way road can be accommodated with the planned configuration of the new building. The city's peer reviewer on traffic, BETA Group, has submitted a written opinion that one-way inbound is preferred over one-way outbound at this driveway, if special considerations for the Hotel's shuttle golf carts are not included in the analysis. The traffic engineers agree that the exit onto Derby Street is generally not a problem and does not encounter extensive queuing on Derby Street. • The recent request for a contribution to the City for tree plantings on Congress Street has been accepted by the applicant. • The request for language defining some internal traffic flow within the site is rejected by the applicant. Board Discussion: Various Board members addressed aspects of the draft decision as follows: Chair Puleo spoke to the issue of parking and suggested the applicant be required to return to the Board if they lose the lease on the south Congress Street lot. He suggested the applicant pursue the possibility of purchasing the lot from National Grid. Atty Atkins advised the client will accept this change. Mr. Rieder requested the additional trees not be limited to Congress Street, but also include Derby Street; at a total of five additional street trees, distributed three to Congress and two to Derby Street. Mr. Clarke expressed concern at the absence of crosswalk striping on Wharf Street and Union Street where they intersect Derby Street and asked if the City or the developer own these parts of these streets. If the developer owns them; please stripe them. The developer has agreed to provide and maintain crosswalk striping if they own this part of the streets. Mr. Clarke also requested clarity on where the golf carts park; Mr. Sasso advised they are in front of the hotel currently. The Board noted they cannot be parked on the sidewalk. Mr. Ready encouraged the developer to be diligent and enforce management of the golf cart parking as it is not a stipulation in the decision. Mr. Clarke summarized his previous concerns regarding traffic flow within the project. While still not in favor of the one-way south driveway from Congress Street, he accepts the reasons to compromise on this issue. He is particularly concerned that the developer regularly blocks access to the Congress Street north exit from the parking lot with the use of traffic cones and requests a stipulation to prohibit blocking traffic flow in this manner. During the ensuing general discussion of the traffic flow details, the Board requested and the applicant agreed to add a condition to install signage; 1) DO NOT ENTER sign to prohibit right turn from Wharf Street into the hotel complex (outside the PUD), and 2) ONE-WAY sign on the driveway east of the hotel.This signage will be noted on the site plan. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—July 17, 2014 .- - Page 10 of 10 After extensive discussions regarding traffic flow within the site, the applicant agreed to a stipulation that there will be no blockade to prohibit traffic flow within the development between the Derby Street driveway and the bank exit at the north Congress Street driveway. This remedy was posed as a six- month trial period. In the event the applicant finds this negatively impacts business operations, the applicant may present evidence to the Planning Board and request the right to impose traffic flow limitations within the development. Board Discussion: Chairman Puleo, alternating with Ms. Menon, read into the record the draft decision, incorporating changes as discussed.The Board collectively edited the draft decision,careful to confirm agreement on the wording of edits. Motion and Roll Call Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the Site Plan Review application the Planned Unit Development Special Permit, and the Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the proposed new five-story hotel building with 41 hotel units, with conditions,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready. Mr.Anderson Ms Sides Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder and Mr. Griset, none(0)opposed. Matt Veno was ineligible to vote. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Old/New Business Chair Puleo announced the resignation of Board member Tim Ready, effective July 30, 2014; and shared a copy of Tim's letter to the Mayor. The Board members all expressed warm thanks for Tim's service to the Board and the community and affection for his thoughtful generosity. He will be missed. Adjournment Motion and Vote: Tim Ready made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo. Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 10:55pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at:http://www.solem.com/Pages/SalemMA PlonMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 8/7/2014 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2814 SEP I o September 11, 2014 FILE # CITY CLERK, SALEM.MASS. North River Canal, LLC C/o Joseph Correnti, Esq. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: 28 Goodhue Street (Map 16, Lot 372),North River Apartments, Site Plan Review, Wetland and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit Decision of Planning Board to grant Request for Insignificant Change to building footprint and demolition of existing buildings The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, July 17, 2014 to discuss your request for the approval of an Insignificant Change to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Wetland and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit, to allow after-the-fact demolition of a brick outbuilding, which according to the originally approved plans, was to be integrated into the new development. The discussion was continued to July 31, 2014 (but the meeting was cancelled), and August 7, 2014. The discussion was concluded and a • vote conducted on August 7, 2014. A letter submitted by Thomas Galvin of JD LaGrasse & Associates, Inc. on July 10, 2014, states that the outbuilding, designed as a community room for development residents, was excessively costly to develop and was omitted from the construction drawings. The brick outbuilding was demolished and the community space was been integrated into the footprint of the constructed building. The petitioner presented the current site plan "Site Improvement Plan" sheet C-1.0, dated May 13, 2013. The Board also considered the series of Demolition Delay Waivers issued by the Salem Historical Commission (dated August 13, 2004, November 4, 2004, and April 21, 2005) illustrating the process that resulted in Historical Commission approval for demolition of all existing buildings on the site, including the brick outbuilding. The Planning Board voted six (6) in favor(Mr. Puleo—Chair, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Veno, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset)and none (0) opposed, to grant the approval of the Insignificant Change request, approving the demolition of the brick outbuilding, and the resulting modified building footprint as shown on the "Site Improvement Plan" dated May 13, 2013. This determination shall become part of the record for this project If you require further information, please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning & Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sin�ceyely, �PU'Q,�' Char-les P�o, Chairman . Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk m CITY OF SALEM r PLANNING BOARD 18I4 AUG 13 P I- 26 CITY CLERK, SALEM. MASS, August 12,2014 Pasquanna Developers, Inc. Patrick DeIulis, President 31 Collins Street Terrace Lynn, MA 01902 RE: Board Decision on the request for release of Lots 2 and 4 from the Covenant of the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 18 Thorndike Street The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, July 17, 2014 to discuss your request to release lots 2 and 4 in the 18 Thorndike Street Subdivision. The Planning Board decided by a vote of 9-0 in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Yale, and Mr. Veno) and none (0) opposed, to release Lots 2 and 4 from the Covenant recorded at the Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds at Book 32192, Page 168. This determination shall become part of the record for this project. If you require further information, please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning & Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely, af.w Charles Puleo Chairman Salem Planning Board Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk fir; I iia - �� � ac�� � VTOZ aunt - ZZOZ I ! jdV slepaleN OuijaaN pjeol3Id OY 3A09A� V' ti te-0'• .• A J rr•` �I`�LI(111i0� ,To YAC t 1 ( 00 �-q City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date r6 me Mailing Address jhon?# Email Cp v vk ;tea`S 1q�c/'A�-a�(� {� � /� ►eta r e em E l Ua ` ( aV1h. S1 }�i �J� �3 Y10 CO VI, • Page of--- CITY OF SALEM c PLANNING BOARD 2114 JUN 16 P 12' I6 + i-fEE,4 CITY CLERK, SALEM, NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salern Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,June 19, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Krell Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, ATA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA - REVISED I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • June 5, 2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include • an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34, Lot 436);THE REtMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WI-]ARF, CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City,Council regarding the proposed amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Brewery,Distillery, or Winery with a Tasting Room" and"Tasting Room"under Section 10; and to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Brewery,Distillery, or Winery with Tasting Room"use, to be allowed by-right in I and BPD zones, and by special permit of the Board of Appeals in the Bl,B2, B4, and B5 zones. V. ADJOURNMENT Knawyour rigbtr under the Open Meeting Law iM.G.L c. 3011 J 18-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 through J 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" • City Hall, Salem, Mass. orr � ( (Q, l�( at (d:I to Pth in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 JUN 12 P 1: 4b FILL ff NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLUM, SALEM. MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, June 19, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • June 5, 2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include • an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 489); 23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 446); 235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34, Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Kno:vyour nuhts render the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-2 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 throngh 5 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official ulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on Q �_ C16L 1k at l -`ltn P(K in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, • Sections 18-25. �j City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 19, 2014 • Page 1 of 3 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,June 19,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,June 5, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:04 pm. Roll Call Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Dale Yale and Randy Clarke.Absent: Helen Sides, Bill Griset and Matt Veno. Also present: Dana Menon,Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Approval of Minutes Jun 5, 2014 Draft Meeting Minutes Edits were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Tim Ready made a motion to approve the minutes as revised seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with six (6)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson Ms. Vale, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. Regular Agenda Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34,Lot 489); 23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34,Lot 446; 235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions:None Attorney George Atkins of Ronan, Segal& Harrington, 59 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant and requested the public hearing be continued to July 17, 2014.As a point of personal privilege Atty Atkins extended an apology to the board for any tensions unintentionally generated • during his presentation at the June 5, 2014 meeting. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: City of Salem—Planning Board i! Meeting Minutes—June 19, 2014 Page 2 of 3 • Jim Treadwell, 36 Felt Street, noted the Herbert Lot is still included in the agenda although this lot is no longer considered part of the application per the proponent. Motion and Vote: Tim Readil made a motion to continue the Public hea ng to IuIV 17 2014 d seconde b Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with six 6 in avor Mr. Puleo Mr. Read Mr.Anderson Ms. Yale Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder and none ful ovoosed. Old/New Business A joint public hearing with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Brewery, Distillery, or Wine 10;and to amend the ry with a Tasting Room" and "Tasting Room" under Section Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Brewery, Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room" use, to be allowed by-right in I and BPD zones,and by special permit of the Board of Appeals in the B3, 62, B4,and BS zones. Ms. Menon circulated a revised draft of the proposed amendment based on input from the joint public hearing of the City Council and the Planning Board on June 16th existing boards. . Edits do not reiterate the power of The Board took up each of the following concerns expressed at the joint public hearing on June 16, 2014, and addressed them in group discussion: • Proposed amendment language needs to be modified: • o Ensure it complements M.G.L. Chapter 138 language without contradiction regarding pour sizes and by-right vs.special permit. • Special/marketing events need to be carefully managed to avoid negative impact on the neighborhoods(traffic and late night noise). • Adequate notification of abutters when application is submitted. • Concerns regarding disposal of spent vegetative material/trash and possible odors in the neighborhood. • Councilor Siegel's concern about including the BPD zone as most tenants/occupants in this zone prefer industrial neighbors not retailers. The Board concluded: • Special/marketing events will be managed by the Licensing Board and Zoning Board of Appeals as both these boards have extensive oversight and can address hours of operation. They can also impose a range of conditions and restrictions to protect neighbors in dense residential zones. Capacity for events is determined by the building inspector and fire department. • Adequate notice to abutters is routinely provided by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the application stage of a project. Licensing requirements associated with tasting rooms have public notice requirements from the Licensing Board. • The Board of Health and Building Inspector should be able to provide adequate to over sight withreBard to ventilation, trash/spent vegetative disposal. • The proposed ordinance amendment is attached to the Industrial Uses table; the tasting room as defined does not meet the definition of retailer;this ordinance amendment will fall under • industrial uses. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 19, 2014 Page 3 of 3 • Specifically with regard to the proposed language to address pouring sizes, the Board reviewed the relevant sections of M.G.L. c. 138, § 19, Farmer Series Pouring Permits for Farmer-Breweries, Farmer- Wineries and Famer-Distilleries.The state defines the size of the tasting pour for each type of beverage. Mr. Ready asked if the city solicitor had reviewed the latest draft; Ms. Menon advised not yet. Mr. Read clarified Y a ified the Board could recommend the amendments subject to review by city solicitor. His sense is that the proposed edits to the draft address the concerns raised by City Councilors without usurping any responsibilities of the Zoning Board of Appeals, or other applicable entities. Chair Puleo observed that although members of the public were in attendance,the public hearing for this matter was closed on June 16, 2014. Members of the public should address any comments to their city councilor. The revised draft amendment was read into the record for the benefit of Planning Board members and the public in attendance. Motion and Roll Call Vote: Tim Ready made a motion to endorse the draft amendments subject to review by the City solicitor and recommend adoption by the Ci tv Council seconded by Ben Anderson The vote was five (S)in favor(Mr Puleo Mr Ready Mr Anderson Ms Yale and Mr. Rieder)and none(0) imposed, with one abstention (Mr. Clarke), • Adjournment Motion and Vote: Dale Yale made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with sax(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr. Ready Mr.Anderson Ms Yale Mr. Clarke and Mr. Riederl and none(0)opposed Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 8:45pm. For actions where the decisions are incorporated by reference into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at:http://www salem com/Popes/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 7/17/2014 • • , CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 JUN -9 P 12: 30 NOTICE OF MEETING FILE 1t CITY CLERK, SALEM, MAS,5. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council will be holding a Joint Public Hearing on Monday,June 16, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington Street Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. REGULAR AGENDA A joint public hearing with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with a Tasting Room" and"Tasting Room" under Section 10; and to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use • Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new"Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with Tasting Room"use, to be allowed by-right in I and BPD zones, and by special permit of the Board of Appeals in the B1, B2, B4, and B5 zones. III. OLD/NEW BUSINESS IV. ADJOURNMENT Knamyour nghtr under the Open Meeting Lam MG.L c. 30A S 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 thmagb 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on c n l ' ZDV� at /0!30?h in accordan th MGL Ghap. 30/4, Sections 18-25. City of Salem—Joint Public Hearing, City Council and Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 16, 2014 Page 1 of 5 City of Salem Planning Board &Salem City Council Meeting Minutes Monday,June 16,2014 A joint public hearing of the Salem Planning Board and the Salem City Council was held on Monday,June 16, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at City Council Chambers, City Hall, 93 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. City Council President Bob McCarthy opened the meeting at 7:05pm. Roll Call Planning Board members present were:Tim Ready(Acting Chair), Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder, Dale Yale, Helen Sides, Bill Griset and Matthew Veno. Absent: Chuck Puleo and Randy Clarke. City Councillors present were: Robert McCarthy (President),Thomas Furey, William Legault, Elaine Milo, Arthur Sargent, Heather Famico,Todd Siegel, David Eppley,Josh Turiel, Beth Gerard and Joseph O'Keefe. Also present: Lynn Duncan, Director of the Department of Planning and Community Development, Dana Menon,Staff Planner, Cheryl LaPointe,City Clerk, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Planning Board Acting Chair Tim Ready introduced the members of the Planning Board in attendance. • Agenda A joint public hearing with the City Council to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance to add a definition for"Brewery, Distillery, or Winery with a Tasting Room"and "Tasting Room" under Section 30;and to amend the Table of Principal and Accessory Use Regulations under Section 3.0 to add a new "Brewery, Distillery,or Winery with Tasting Room" use,to be allowed by-right in I and BPD zones,and by special permit of the Board of Appeals in the Bl, B2, B4,and B5 zones. Director of Planning and Community Development Lynn Duncan gave a brief presentation on the background of the proposed ordinance amendment and the research conducted to consider the issues and prepare the draft language. Ms. Duncan advised interest has been expressed in tasting rooms associated with wineries, distilleries and breweries.The Building Inspector determined there is no guidance in the current zoning code to provide for this business. City Solicitor Elizabeth Rennard has offered some basic guidelines on the roles of state and local governance entities regarding this type of business. The licensing component applies to farmer-based facilities(breweries,wineries and distilleries) per Chapter 138 of the state law;the ABCC issues farmer licenses to produce, but to pour and/or serve samples businesses will need local licensing board approval. Ms. Duncan briefly outlined the formal process to move the proposed amendment forward.Typically the Council requests the Planning Board to consider the matter in more detail before taking action. Should the Council refer the matter to the Planning Board for recommendations, the Planning Board has • 21 days to provide input or the Council is free to act without benefit of their recommendation.The Planning Board is prepared to address the issue at the next regular meeting,June 19, 2014, should the City of Salem—Joint Public Hearing, City Council and Planning Board + Meeting Minutes—June 16, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Council request. City Council has 90 days from the public hearing date to vote on the ordinance;with I" • and 2nd passage as required. A two-thirds vote will be needed to pass any proposed amendment. Planning Board and City Council Discussion: Mr. Rieder asked for clarification of Line 3 versus the last sentence of the proposed ordinance. Is the intent to restrict tastings to beverages produced on-site only, or to allow for some beverages produced offsite? Ms. Duncan replied the wording does need to be edited,the intent is for the beverages to be produced on-site; non-consumables such as tee-shirts, etc. may be produced offsite, as long as they're branded by the brewery/distillery/winery. Mr. Anderson expressed concern that the B1 neighborhood is on the list ofro osed zones t P P o allow the proposed use by special permit. He asked for clarification, as the B1 neighborhoods tend to be mostly residential with small commercial businesses. He expressed concern there may be events that run late into the evening and disturb neighbors. Ms. Duncan replied that the Board of Appeals hearing for a special permit would provide an opportunity for this concern to be heard. She also noted the NRCC overlay district is not included in this proposed amendment. Councilor O'Keefe complimented the planning office on their research. He expressed concern regarding any special events held in such a facility and the possibility for negative impact on neighbors, particularly in the B1 zone. He asked for clarification about the approval process for any special events. Ms. Duncan replied the thinking is to provide flexibility at the ordinance level.The special permit issued by the • Licensing Board and Board of Appeals would provide oversight of the special/marketing events as these two entities have regular experience in setting conditions for special events across a range of venues. Councilor O'Keefe wanted to know how apple cuttings will be disposed of, what the Ph of the vegetative waste is, and how it would be handled. Ms. Duncan advised some members of the public may be able to give insight. Councilor McCarthy expressed a concern about the occupancy maximum and meeting safety requirements in this type of facility. Ms. Duncan advised the building inspector and fire department requirements would still apply. Councilor Sargent expressed a concern about the special events aspect of the proposed ordinances- neighborhood noise and parking congestion both pose problems for the neighborhood. He asked that the Planning Board consider these issues in their deliberations. President McCarthy opened the hearing to the public for comment,including additional questions from City Council and Planning Board members: Denise Snape, owner of the cider-making business Far From the Tree, located at 102 Jackson Street, spoke in favor of the proposed amendment. She encouraged the City Council and Planning Board to support them as small business operators that are connecting with the community via participation in the Salem Farmers' Market and other appropriate activities. Alex Snape,co-owner of Far From the Tree, advised the apples for their cider are not processed in • Salem, rather the raw juice is trucked in and the product is aged here,which is a typical practice for both ` City of Salem–Joint Public Hearing, City Council and Planning Board Meeting Minutes–June 16, 2014 • Page 3 of 5 cider-makers and wineries.As their space is quite limited, any marketing events would anticipate 10-20 attendees; hours of operation for the tasting room would likely be limited to a few days a week.They use a small amount of water for cleaning, no chemicals.Their expectations for traffic volume is low, they have no idea of how many customers to expect for a tasting room.The Ph of the cider is acidic, approximately 3.34. Ian Hunter, 14% Fort Ave,Salem, spoke in favor. He is in planning stages of a distillery that he and a partner hope to open in Salem. The amendment is needed to provide for small scale manufacturing which requires face-to-face interaction with customers. Salem is uniquely positioned for his proposed business—the existing tourism base will support artisan producers. One of their products will be grain- based.Spent grain does not enter the waste stream, and can be resold to farmers.Waste water is very minimal. CO2 produced through fermentation can rebalance the Ph of the waste water. Special events are likely corporate events(private tastings and meetings). On premise license is not permitted by-right in the farmer licensing at the state level. Jesse Brenneman, 65 Telegraph Street, Boston, (partner of Ian Hudson) provided operational insights. The mash is the process of extracting sugars from the grain, spent grain is what is left over. Farmers are happy to take this material. Councilor Milo asked for clarification on fermentation equipment(vats outside the building), storage of spent grain, and expressed concern about lingering odors. Spent grain should be kept in sealed containers. Mr. Brenneman stated that typically the spent grain was disposed of within a couple of days, and he confirmed they have not yet talked to South Esssex Sewerage District. • Deacon Giles Distillery is the proposed name of their business. Chris Loring, 19 Carlton Street,owner of Notch Brewing and founder of Tremont Brewery in Charlestown, MA, spoke in favor. Boston Beerworks, an existing operation here in Salem, provides good insight into odors and manufacturing concerns. He cited several local examples of a pouring license adjacent to a producer. He asked that the City consider several important distinctions in drafting the amendment language: • Language related to retail sales must be worded carefully • Selling full-pour for onsite consumption—more than a samplesize; the proposed draft ordinance is vague on this point.Suggests that it match MGL Chapter 138 language. He hopes to open a craft brewery in Salem and is considering a location on Grove Street which is in the NRCC district. For benefit of Council and Planning Board members, Ms. Duncan clarified that the NRCC cannot be included in the current proposed amendment because the addition of that zoning district to the proposed amendment would be a significant change from what was advertised in the public notice, and would require a new public notice. There are ways to work with Mr. Loring if he is interested in a location for a brewery in the NRCC zone, such as rezoning the parcel he is considering, etc. Chris McGowan 28 Federal St, Salem, spoke in favor. He is a hobbyist who hopes to open a craft brewery in the future, he pointed out the growth of the craft beer market. Many of our popular restaurants carry beverages from small/craft producers. New England is a hot spot for this movement; it makes sense for Salem to join it.Tastings help small entrepreneurs compete with the large marketing • budgets of larger companies. Portsmouth NH is enjoying a boom in this business sector. V 1t City of Salem—Joint Public Hearing, City Council and Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 16, 2014 Page 4 of 5 • City Councilors and Planning Board members explored various operational details with members of the public with experience/knowledge of the business. In general the following concerns were identified: • Proposed amendment language needs to be modified: o Ensure it complements M.G.L. Chapter 138 language without contradiction regarding pour sizes and by-right vs. special permit. • Special and/or marketing events need to be carefully managed to avoid negative impact on the neighborhoods(traffic and late night noise). • Adequate notification of abutters when application for license/special permit is submitted. City Councilors and Planning Board members satisfied themselves that existing governance entities (Board of Health, Building Inspector, Fire Department,Zoning Board of Appeals, etc.) would be able to provide for oversight within the existing framework of governance and licensure with regards to: Maximum occupancy Hours of operation Food service Types of special/marketing events Delivery of supplies/raw materials Disposal of waste water and spent vegetative material Ms. Duncan reported the Salem Chamber of Commerce has submitted a letter in favor of the proposed amendment. General in favor, subject to language edits as generally discussed were: • Councilor Gerard, Councilor Turiel, Councilor O'Keefe, Councilor Eppley, Councilor Furey, Councilor Milo, Councilor McCarthy, Councilor Sargent, Councilor Famico and Councilor Legault. Councilor Siegel generally in favor, but expressed moderate concern that the use would be "by-right" in the BPD zone. Planning Board Members generally in favor: Mr. Ready, Ms. Yale, Mr. Griset, Mr.Veno, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Anderson and Ms. Sides. Opposed: no opposition to the proposed amendment was made from a City Councilor, Planning Board member or member of the public in attendance. Councilor McCarthy asked that a copy of the State's farmers pouring license be provided to Council and Planning Board members. Ms. Duncan confirmed the planning department will forward the relevant passages. Motion and Vote: Councilor O'Keefe made a motion to close the public hearing The vote was unanimous with eleven (111 in favor (Councilors McCarthy Turiel O'Keefe Leaault Famico Gerard Furey Sargent Eppley Siegel and Milo). Motion and Vote: Councilor Turiel made a motion to refer the matter to the Planning Board for their recommendation. The vote was unanimous with eleven (ISI in favor.• (Councilors McCarthy Turiel O'Keefe, Leaault, Famico, Gerard Furey Sargent Eppley Siegel and Milo) • City of Salem—Joint Public Hearing, City Council and Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 16, 2014 Page 5 of 5 • Old/New Business None. Adjournment Motion and Vote: Councilor Omaburn the meeting.f � 4 'Kee a de a motion to ad . The vote was unanimous with all in favor. President McCarthy adjourned the meeting at 8:40pm. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 7/17/2014 • • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 MAY 30 A II: 41 HL.E. it NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,June S, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Anner, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles.W. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • May 29, 2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Request for insignificant change to the Witch Hill Subdivision Decision of January 20, 2005 and the Modification to a Form C Subdivision Decision of March 1,2012. The proposed changes consist of the addition of lots 216, 217,218, 228 and 229 to Phase II; and the release of those lots from the covenant with the City. Applicant: BARTLETT AND STEADMAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. Location: MARTIN LANE,NURSE WAY, AND DELL STREET (Map 14, Lots 30, 31, 33,34, 53, 54, 55, 144 and Map 9 Lots 259,260) Project: Application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR), to subdivide Technology Way (existing Lot 723, City of Salem) and to subdivide the adjacent existing Lot 740 (KAK Realty Trust),in order to_ convey a portion of the existing Technology Way Lot to KAK Realty Trust for future development, and to create a cul-de-sac at the new terminus of"1 ethnology Way, under ownership by the City of Salem. Applicant: KAK REALTY TRUST and CITY OF SALEM Location: TECHNOLOGY WAY(Map 7, Parcels 0079 and 0078;Lot 723 on Plan 11802-54;Lot 740 on Plan 11802-61;Lot 724 on Plan 11802-5). Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Pertnit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 'A BOSTON STREET (Map '15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) Project: Continuation of the public hearing fora petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include • an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: TI IE. SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. ons 30. at I j FA1A it accordan a with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. City of Salem Planning Board • ' Agenda for June 5, 2014 Meeting- Page eetingPage 2 of 2 Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Nlap 34, Lot 489); 23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34, Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST' (Map 34, Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (T\/lap 34,Lot 408) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c: 30115 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through 2-2033. 120 WAS][INGtoN STREET, SALEM, MASSACr]USET1S 01970 • PlIONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 %V VRW.SALEM.COM 0 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 JUN 25 P 2: 50 CITY CLERK, SALEK MASS, June 25, 2014 Bartlett & Steadman Development Corp. C/o Attorney George Atkins Ronan, Segal & Harrington 59 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Witch Hill (Martin Lane, Nurse Way, and Dell Street) Decision of Planning Board to grant a Request for Insignificant Change—to allow addition of lots to Phase II, and release of those lots from the covenant with the City. The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, June 5, 2014 to discuss your request for approval of an Insignificant Change to the January 20, 2005 Decision approving a Form C-Definitive Subdivision, a Cluster Residential Development Special Permit and a Wetlands District Special Permit, and to the March 1, 2012 Modification to a Form C Subdivision Decision; to allow the addition of lots 216, 217, 218, 228 and 229 to Phase II of construction, and to release those five lots from the covenant with the City. The developer will continue, without amendment, the Tri- Party Agreement securing completion of the construction described in the subdivision plans and Planning Board Decisions. The Planning Board voted by a vote of 8-0 in favor (Mr. Puleo - Chair, Mr. Ready - Vice Chair, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Clarke, and Ms. Yale) and none (0) opposed, to grant the approval of the Insignificant Change request. This determination shall become part of the record for this project If you require further information, please contact Dana Menon, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning & Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Charles Puleo, Chairman Salem Planning Board • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GoON¢a DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Dana Menon,Staff Planner DATE: June 3, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting—June 5,2014 Please find the following in your packet: • ➢ Agenda ➢ Planner's Memo ➢ Draft minutes from the May 29,2014 meeting Materials for the agenda items are included for the 6/5/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Discussion and Vote—Request of Bartlett&Steadman Development Corp for insignificant change to the Witch Hill Subdivision Decision of January 20,2005 and the Modification to a Form C Subdivision Decision of March 1,2011. The proposed changes consist of the addition of lots 216, 217,218,228 and 229 to Phase 11;and the release of those lots from the covenant with the City. Located at MARTIN LANE, NURSE WAY,AND DELL STREET(Map 14, Lots 30,31,33,34,53,54,55, 144 and Map 9 Lots 259,260. This project was approved in a Decision issued January 20, 2005. A request for an Insignificant Change to allow the proposed sidewalks to be asphalt rather than concrete, due to the high cost of concrete,was approved by the Planning Board in November 2011. In March 2012 a Modification to the original Decision (of January 2005)was approved by the Planning Board. This Modification included re-phasing of the construction, a revised time for completion for each phase,and a new tri- party agreement for$500,000 in light of the work completed up to that point. These three Decisions, the plans approved in the 2005 Decision,the 2012 tri-party agreement,the 2012 Homeowners Association Declaration, and the current petition for re-phasing are all included under Attachment A. City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—June 3,2014 Page 2of4 • 2. Discussion and Vote-Application by KAK Realty Trust and the City of Salem for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control(ANR), to subdivide Technology Way(existing Lot 723, City of Salem)and to subdivide the adjacent existing Lot 740(KAK Realty Trust), in order to convey a portion of the existing Technology Way Lot to KAK Realty Trust for future development, and to create a cul-de-sac at the new terminus of Technology Way, under ownership by the City of Salem. The properties are located at Technology Way.Map 7,Parcels 0079 and 0078,Lot 723 on Plan 11802-54;Lot 740 on Plan 11802-61;Lot 724 on Plan 11802-5. Thermal Circuits on Technology Way is looking to expand,and the City is working with them to accommodate their expansion at their existing facility in Salem. Technology Way currently wraps around the existing Thermal Circuits building, limiting the opportunities for expansion. The proposed subdivision of land would result in a reconfiguration of the existing lot and the existing Technology Way to allow Thermal Circuits to expand over the area that is currently the end of Technology Way. Technology Way—currently Lot 723-is owned by the City of Salem. KAK Realty Trust owns the Thermal Circuits lots—currently Lot 724 and Lot 740. The proposed plan shows these three existing lots divided into 5 new Lots,with new numbers assigned by the land court. Lot 723—the existing Technology Way (City of Salem)—is divided into Lot 741 and Lot 742. Lot 740(KAK Realty Trust) is divided into Lot 743 and Lot 744. Lot 724(KAK Realty Trust) is re-numbered as Lot 245. After approval of these lot subdivisions, Lot 741 (the existing end of Technology Way)would be transferred from the City of Salem to KAK Realty Trust to accommodate the Thermal Circuits facility Expansion. Lot 743 would be transferred from KAK Realty Trust to the City of Salem, in order to create a • new cul-de-sac at the end of Technology Way. Technology Way would then consist of Lots 742 and 743. KAK Realty Trust would have ownership of Lots 744, 741,and 745. Attorney Correnti is presenting this application,and will be able to provide a full explanation at the meeting on Thursday. The Form A application and plan, as well as an excerpt of the minutes from the City Council vote at which the end portion of Technology Way(proposed Lot 741)was abandoned, are included under Attachment B. 3.Discussion and Vote—Application of OHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem,Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 X BOSTON STREET(NRCC).Specifically, the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking,landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. The Planning Department is working on a draft Decision for this project,and will send it out to Board members by end-of-day Wednesday. It is anticipated that the Board will be prepared to vote on the petition at this upcoming meeting. The Fire Department issued some comments on this project last week. I forwarded these comments to the applicant, and they will incorporate them as needed into their plans. Any conditions that are not addressed in the plans can be incorporated into the Conditions of the Board's Decision. The Planning Department will follow up on these items prior to the 6/5 meeting. The Fire Department's comments are included under Attachment C. 40 City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—June 3, 2014 • Page 3 of 4 4. Discussion and Vote—Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building&the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. At the May 29`"Special Meeting of the Planning Board,the applicant stated that their traffic engineer would conduct a parking count of the existing hotel lot this past Saturday(5/31),as there was an event booked and the hotel would be at full capacity. The City's peer reviewer, Ken Petraglia of BETA,also observed the hotel parking lot during this time. Mr. Petraglia also made periodic visits to the Congress Street lot during this time,to assess its utilization. Mr. Petraglia has recommended that the applicant revise their plans for the south Congress Street drive to allow for two-way flow,and that the applicant should provide mitigation funds for the creation of a crosswalk across Congress Street,to accommodate pedestrian travel between the hotel and the Congress Street lot. This crosswalk would also serve to connect the east and west portions of the Harborwalk. The applicant's data from the site observation and Mr. Steadman's comments on this data and his observations at the site are included under Attachment D. The Board made the following requests at the 5/29/2014 meeting: • That the speed table to the south of the existing hotel building be shown on the plans • That consideration be made of a Condition to the Board's Decision that no parking for hotel guests, restaurant patrons, or event attendees be allowed in the Herbert Street lot. • • That the City and the applicant meet to work toward a common understanding of the current status and potential future treatment of the 3.6" pipe under the existing Marina Building prior to the Board's issuance of a Decision. The Board recognized that the existing conditions of the pipe are not fully known, so that unforeseen conditions may be revealed upon excavation of the site. Ben Anderson specifically made the following requests: • Acoustically and visually screen the existing condominiums to the east of the proposed hotel building from the activity at the proposed delivery and trash area. • Activate the "gateway turret"with lighting,and with some reference to the maritime history of the wharf • The edges of the hotel should be activated • The applicant should provide the Board with perspective views of the proposed building from various key viewpoints around the site and adjacent roadways. The applicant has met a second time with Helen Sides and Paul Durand of the Design Review Board,and presented revised elevations. A few additional suggestions will be incorporated into the drawings, and the applicant will be presenting the revised elevations at the June 5`" meeting. The Board requested that the Planning Department provide any information on Operations and Maintenance, including location and maintenance of waste receptacles,from the original 1999 Decision on the Waterfront Hotel. Condition#19"Maintenance" of the 1999 Decision states: "a) Refuse removal,ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. b)Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. c) Maintenance of all landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant, his successors or assigns. The applicant, his successors or City of Salem:Planning Board Staff Memorandum—June 3,2014 Page 4 of 4 • assigns,shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two-(2)year period." The DEP License for the project(2004)stated: • "...A minimum of eight(8)wooden benches and seven (7)trash receptacles shall be provided [along the walkway]." Page 3 • Special Condition 10: "The Licensee shall suitably screen the exterior dumpster(s) identified on the final license plan so as to not be visible to pedestrians from the publicly accessible portions of the site, Derby Street, and Pickering Way." • Special Condition 11: "The Licensee shall utilize best efforts to arrange all deliveries and trash pick-ups to and from the project area at such times so as to minimize conflicts with the marina and other land uses in the project vicinity." • Special Condition 12: "The Licensee shall submit,within three(3) months of the issuance of this License, a written management plan for the Department's [DEP's] prior review and written approval that describes the manner in which the Licensee will ensure that all interior facilities of public accommodation, exterior publicly accessible open space facilities and public benefits associated with this project and required herein, are effectively sustained..." The management plan was a DEP requirement, and should have been submitted directly to DEP. DEP is responsible for enforcement of the requirements of their licenses. If the Planning Board has specific concerns about Operations and Maintenance for this project,the Board should establish Conditions in their Decision that address these concerns, so that they can be monitored and enforced locally. • OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS Matthew Veno is joining the Planning Board,filling the term of George McCabe. • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board R � n goa�G� Date .6 / s / 201 4- Name Mailing Address Phone # Email �� c�a.�lo�.�v( 3loGnn�uLo {-��ll R++ �'Id-?Yf-��36 lLs.( 6tor� c-�t� A•o�- cosh tSnh d� ! e A/ei 719 d�/l�f �142N.C�i//�'�%/�� Scyi'� -�elSALFiLI N/� iiz�� 4�� � ✓5 ------------- e • Page of 70-92 '� Boston Street �I June 13.2014 Page I of CITY OF SALEM 9r ' PLANNING BOARD1014 JUN 13 A 9 19 Site Plan Review and Flood Flazard Overlay District Special Permit Decision 70-92 Yz BOSTON STREET (Map 15, Lot 299 & Map 16, Lot 139) June 13, 2014 DFIM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. C/o .Joseph Correnti, Esq. Serafini, Darling & Correnti 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 Y, BOSTON 0 STREET (NRCC). On Thursday, February 20, 2014 the City of Salem Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 9.5 Site Plan Reviety and Section 3.1 Flood flazard Overlay District of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, at the request of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc., for the Properties located at 70-92 Boston Street (Map 15, Lot 299) and 92 Y Boston Street (Map 16, Lot 139). The proposed project includes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. The Public Hearing was continued to March 6, 2014, April 17, 2014, May 1, 2014, May 15, 2014, and .June 5, 2014. The public hearing was closed on June 5, 2014. In considering approval of the Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit, the Planning Board hereby finds that the proposed project meets the provisions of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section S.I Flood Hccard Overlay District, as follows: L The proposed uses comply in all respects to the uses and provisions of the underl in districts in w (cti the anfits` ocate d. - The underlying districts are: North River Canal Corridor (NRCC). &W-anee Corridor Overlay District (ECOD), Business Highway (132), and Residential Two-Fcunily District (R2). • L'O IV: sin.�'urn.v .Srerrr. .S.v,1.�1, ALt ,�:�i'11t srrrs 01970 • Puu.,�r: 978.019.SNO 1%; X 978.7,10.oJio,j 70-92 '/ Boston Street June 13, 2014 Page 2 of 2. There are adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets and property, particularly in the event of flooding of the lot(s) or adjacent lot(s) caused by either overspill from water bodies or high runoff. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)for Essex County (Panel 0418G) dated July 16, 2014, a Special Flood ffazard Area Zone AE with a Base Flood Elevation of 10 feet is indicated along a portion of Goodhue Street adjacent to the site. A small area in the north-east corner of the site would be at or below 10 feet elevation. No on-site vehicular or pedestrian movement would be effected by jloocling of tiuis area. Employee parking and entry will be in the garage, which is at elevation 12 feet and 13.2 feet. Access to this garage is offof Goodhue Sheet. portions of which cure below elevation !0. This could potentially limit use of the employee garage during a 1% annual chance flood event. Etnployees world still be able to enter/exit th" builc/ing and could park in the Boston Street lot, or utilize nearby public transportation options and alternative public parking arrears. Customer parking and building entry will be in the sur face lot off of Boston Street, located at approximate elevation 32.3 to 36.2 feet. This area, and the access to this area from Boston Street, is outside of the flood zone. When the applicant submitted their Plans to the Planning Board for approval in January 2014, the 2012 Flood Insurance Rate Maps were still in effect. Those 20121MPS indicated that no portion of[he site, nor any portions of Goodhue Street adjacent to the site, was within a flood zone. 3. Utilities, including gas, electricity, fuel, water and sewage disposal, shall be located and constructed so as to protect against breaking, leaking, short-circuiting, grounding or igniting or • any other damage due to flooding. All utilities erre designed based on standard engineering practices crud applicable standards. 4. Where the proposed use will be located within a coastal high hazard area (Zone VE on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps), the Planning Board shall also find the following conditions to be fulfilled: a. New structures or substantial improvements shall be located landward of the reach of mean high tide. b. The support of new structures or substantial improvements shall not be, in whole or in part, by the use of till. N/A: There are no proposed uses within the UE zone as mapped by FEMA on the site. In considering approval of the NRCC Site Plan Review, the Planning Board hereby Finds that the proposed project meets the goals of the North River Canal Corridor Master Plaut, as_stated_ibthe_Ci of __ —Sa em onmg r mance, as follows: 1. Create appropriate development while preserving our historic neighborhood character; The proposed project vvas unanimously recommended for approval by the Salem Design Review Board(DRB) on itlarch 26, 2014, The DRB's role is to review proposals to ensure they are designed to complement and harmonize with adjacent land uses with respect to architecture, scale, landscaping and screening. 20 STRFF l $:�Lf:d 1, �I:ASSA('I II;SFI fS OF97o PIRAIL 978,619J685 FA\ 978.740.0404 70-92 : Boston Street June 13.2014 Page 3 of 9 2. Address transportation issues for existing and new developments; The developer has endeavored to provide the greatest feasible quantity ofon-site parking to accommodate their anticipated employee and customer traffic, without negatively impacting the character of the neighborhood or the Oreetscape experience. Bike racks erre being provided on- site, and design elements for the ease and safety of pedestrian access to and around the .site have been integrated into the plans. Additionally, the developer is contribrding fonds to the City,far the Purposes of traffic mitigation improvements in the area. 3. Enhance the public realm in keeping with our unique neighborhood character. The proposal improves the sidetivalks and the so•eetscape experience along Boston Street, Goodhue Street, and Grove Street inJront ofthe projeet site. At the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on June 5, 2014, the Planning Board voted seven (7) in favor (Puleo, Yale, Anderson, Ready, Sides, Griset, and Rieder), none (0) opposed, to approve the Site Plan Review application, the Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and to allow the applicant to install a six (6) foot high fence, granting relief from the four (4) foot height limitation of the North River Canal Corridor and Entrance Corridor Overlay zones, subject to the following conditions: I. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the following plans: • • "Site Development Plans for Medical Office Building, Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem 70-92 V2 Boston Street" prepared by Griffin Engineering Group, LLC, P.O. Box 7061, 100 Cummings Center, Suite 224 G, Beverly, MA 01915; Perkins + Will, 225 Franklin Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02110; and Lam Partners, Architectural Lighting Design, 84 Sherman Street, Cambridge, MA 02140 - dated January 2014 and revised on: March 24 2014, April 16 2014, April 23 2014, May 14 2014, and 6/4/14, inclusive of sheets N-1, C-I through C-7, A-I through A-6, and SK-0l a. • Final revised landscape plan (sheet L-1) shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to obtaining a Building Permit. 2. Amendments Any insignificant changes 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. Construction Practices A construction shall be carried out in accordance with the following conditions: a. Exterior construction work shall not be conducted between the hours of 5:00 PM and 8:00 AM the following day on weekdays or at any time on Sundays or Holidays. Any interior work conducted during these times will not involve heavy machinery which could generate disturbing noises. • 1_'0 \t'asiu�r�ru� .Srurr.r. .S:u.kz1. .ALss.�stif( ,,1-:rrsOl(lio • uti.�u: 97S.(IoJ6N� t-a.� 97M740.Od().4 70-92 '/: Boston Street June 13, 2014 Page 4 of 9 b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. C. Drilling, blasting, and rock hammering shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM. There shall be no drilling, blasting, or rock hammering on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on surrounding roadways as they leave the site. e. 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. f. All construction vehicles left overnight at the site, must be located completely on the site. g. A Construction Management Plan and Construction Schedule shall be submitted by the applicant. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, 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 li • shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. h. All sidewalks, roadways, utilities, landscaping, etc. damaged during construction shall be replaced or repaired to their pre-construction condition, or better. i. Applicant with its contractor to attend a pre-construction meeting with appropriate city departments. j. No Street shall be closed without prior approval of the City Planner, unless deemed an emergency by the Salem Police Department. 4. 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. 5. Fire Department a.--Atl worksral comp y wit i t e requi1ements of theSalem Fire Department any building permits. prior to the issuance of 6. Building Inspector a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector. • 120 iV':\SINNGiON SrRri'i, S:u_1;�I, L-�Ss,�cnusF"1'c� 01970 • P ()75 ()19 S68� i-:u 978.7=I0.Od04 �ctcvc,<aLF�Lt'u.�i 70-97 V,_ Boston Street June 13, 3014 Page 5 of 9 b. Per Section 8? Entrance Corridor Overlay District, any fence constructed on the site shall require a fence permit issued by the City building department. 7. 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) responsible for the construction of the project. manager who will be on site and directly 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 certifies that soil and ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. c. "file developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. d. "File developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the areari construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a co p or to Health Agent. copy of the exterminator's invoice to the e. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. f. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping • which will occur during construction. g. 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. h. "File Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for firefighting, i. 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. j. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. k. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board I. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. in. The developer shall install grease traps, to contain grease in g the City Engineer. ray water, prior to it entering the city sewer system in developments with 10 or more units and in compliance with the requirements of 11.0 \V*.'f�imuru\ S I Rkk r. S:u,1„��. .AI v.” CIj� SI:rl5 01970 Pnu,�r 9,�.6�yS6N5 1'�.A 97,x.7-10.010-t d 70-92 '/ Boston Street June 13, 2014 Page 6 of 9 n. Salem sits in a Radon Zone 1 and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely high. Therefore, the installation of radon mitigation systems is strongly recommended. 8. Utilities a. The final location for the proposed transformer box will be determined in collaboration with the utility provider. The transformer box shall be located as close to the eastern property boundary as feasible, and as is allowed by Salem Zoning Code. b. Applicant shall investigate the existing drain on adjacent parcel (Witch City Cycle) to determine if drain extends into subject parcel. Applicant shall revisit this existing drain after exploratory excavation is completed. if the drain is determined to be functioning, applicant shall coordinate with the City Engineer to make modifications to the plan as directed. c. The applicant shall coordinate with the City Engineer and City's consultant prior to starting any work related to the cutting and capping of any sewer and water services at the mains in Boston Street, Grove Street, or Goodhue Streets. Applicant to utilize signal trace technology to locate services in advance of or in conjunction with exploratory excavations to improve chances of locating and properly abandoning services. • d. After the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and outside of emergency situations, the emergency generator shall be run only per the minimum allowed manufacturer's recommendations for maintenance purposes. At no time during construction, installation, or standard operation shall the generator be operated outside of the hours of 9:OOam to S:OOpm. 9. Department of Public Services The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the Department of Public Services. 10. Traffic The Applicant, its successors, and assigns agrees to contribute to the City of Salem half of the total Purchase and installation cost of replacing the traffic signal at the Boston Street/Grove Street/Nichols Street intersection, up to an amount not to exceed $60,000 to be used for the purpose of replacing the existing traffic signal at said intersection, or for other traffic mitigation measures as determined appropriate by the City Planner. Such payment shall be made to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 11. Signage a. Per mcommendati(m of the Design Review Board, proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board prior to obtaining a Sign Permit. b. After review and approval by the Design Review Board, the proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved the City Planner and the Sign Review Committee prior to obtaining a Sign Permit. ?Q 1N�SIIICt�fUs $TRLht. S.AL�_.�L 1L�b:S,1tIlI SE.rls 011M) • 11110M. 97 .Fl9.jO i I"�.�' 97j.7!U.O=10d R'�c�C_S:U.FII.i'U.11 70-92 % Boston Street June U. 2014 Pale 7 of 9 12. Lighting a. The applicant shall submit a plan for lighting the site and the building to the Design Review Board for review prior to obtaining a building permit. b. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. C. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy. 13. HVAC a. All HVAC units located on the site shall be visually screened per the plans and images approved by the Planning Board. b. The applicant shall submit plans for the screening of mechanical elements to the Design Review Board for final approval prior to obtaining a building permit. 14. Landscaping a. Trees shall be a minimum diameter of 3 %z" dbh (diameter breast height). �ht). b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or • assigns. c. The final species selection for the five (5) trees located in the landscaped area at the northeast corner of the property, adjacent to the Grove Street/Beaver Street intersection, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to obtaining a Building Permit. 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. The applicant shall submit plans for the screening of dumpsters or other waste receptacles, per the plans and images approved by the Planning Board, to the Design Review Board for final approval prior to obtaining a building permit. f. The proposed battered concrete retaining wall located between the Boston Street and the Beaver StreeUGoodhue Street parking lots shall have an anti-graffiti coating applied if feasible. If anti- graffiti coating is unfeasible, screening vegetation such as ivy or another climbing species shall be planted at the base of the wall as feasible. g. On the final landscape plans submitted for review and approval by the City Planner, the following clarifications shall be added to the "Landscape Legend": Item "E. 12' Decorative Red Maples" shall be 12-foot Japanese Red Maples; Item "C. 6'-10' Holly" shall be 6-to-10 foot Evergreen Holly. 5. Fencing As per the plans as filed, the applicant proposed a six (6) foot high fence adjacent to the residentially 120W SALEM, A�L�ss,�i�uusF�rrs 01970 • Puu..\r: 97S.619.50,y, 70-92 �/ Boston Street June 13. 2014 Page 8 of 9 zoned parcels to the west of the project site. The Board finds that the proposed fence height is appropriate, as it is intended to provide a buffer between the adj of the project site. acent residences and the parking area The proposed fence along the north-west property line bounding the rear of the adjacent residential lots off of Grove Street, shall be a six (6) foot high standard wood stockade fence, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to obtaining a Building Permit. The fence shall terminate even with the corner of the abutting building at 94 Boston Street. This fence termination point shall be shown on the revised landscape plans submitted for review and approval by the City Planner, prior to obtaining a Building Permit. 16. Maintenance d. Refuse removal, recycling, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. e. Maintenance of all 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- (2) year period, from issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. f. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. • 17. As-built Plans a. 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 any Certificate of Occupancy. b. 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 any Certificate of Occupancy. c. A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 18. Violations Violation 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_ majority vote_afdw—Plannin�Board . I hereby certify that a copy of this decision has been tiled with the City Clerk and is 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 • 120 \\,N INhION SI 'i i..1,. Sv.n�i, vSerrs 01970 • PIIUSF 978.01UW P:�.�' 97b'Jd0.Od0<t �r�eu'su_G�Lc'uai 70-92 !/x Boston Street June 13. 2014 Page 9 of 9 Deeds and is indexed under the name of the owner of record is recorded on the owner's Certificate of Title. `file owner or applicant, his successors or assigns, shall pay the fee for recording or registering. Charles M. Puleo Chairman • i bb'-\sniai,rtA 4n,1rr, s,u.it�i. �L�s;,�c'ut'.ti1�'rri 01910 Ptu�.�'r 97S(i1956 I,�.� 978.7-10.O,104 City of Salern —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June .S, 201.4 Page 1 of 12 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,June 5,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,June 5, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:01 pm. alit ill °�. t u t� e" a � IYCt�M Y"^ flt�nN o d tr! ' >�� t i t r Roll Call E T Ekr`.:. ' ` �;e,a• �}r •�� ` Those present were: Chuck Puleo,Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready, Vice Chair, Dale Yale, Randy Clarke, Helen Sides, Bill Griset and Matthew Veno.Absent: None Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Chairman Puleo introduced new Planning Board member Matthew Veno. Mr.Veno will serve the remainder of George McCabe's term. r:»^- -smw• +news. o ^.; Approval of Minutes, �"6tn TJ tTqi May 29,2014 Draft Meeting Minutes No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. • Motion and Vote: Tim Ready made o motion to approve the minutes,seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms Sides, Ms. Yale Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed;Mr. Veno and Mr. Griset were ineligible to vote. n 1" 3i��M _ a�x^� e}y .��, vanxx n"j;� a �'s ,.+vm9r-3Rt f"P` n� i•:+'�.. kRegular Agenda�',.�h;,;, "��" 5� ��§.:�;� �•xu: xd•s ii9 w,syP>.-� i` ��+ c'" , '!c.a . k zaiY r Project: Request for insignificant change to the Witch Hill Subdivision Decision of January 20,2005 and the Modification to a Form C Subdivision Decision of March 1, 2012. The proposed changes consist of the addition of lots 216, 217,218,228 and 229 to Phase II;and the release of those lots from the covenant with the City. Applicant: BARTLETT AND STEADMAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. Location: MARTIN LANE, NURSE WAY,AND DELL STREET(Map 14, Lots 30,31,33,34,53,54, 55, 144 and Map 9 Lots 259,260) Documents and Exhibitions: Definitive Subdivision Plan of Witch Hill,Salem MA, revised Dec 30, 2004. Attorney George Atkins of Ronan, Segal & Harrington, 59 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Atty Atkins reminded the Board the project has been implemented in 3 phases that were previously • approved by the Board. The last phase drawings did not include the remainder of Nurse Way. The request is to slightly move the Phase 11 line to Dell Street, and release the remaining lots for Phase 3.The City of Salem—Planning Board ` Meeting Minutes—June .5, 2014. Page 2 of 1.2 developer has a covenant with the city and is not asking for release of the remaining funds; they will be • available to cover completion of the subdivision.The developer is not asking for a reduction of funds. Board Discussion: • The Board asked if the funds being held are more than adequate; Atty Atkins advised the funds are the original amount agreed to cover the entire project including this last phase. • The Board asked how can they know project is substantially complete; Atty Atkins clarified this statement refers to the roadway and utilities. The developer is now ready to put these five lots up for sale. • The Board clarified there are trails to be added to the outer perimeter; Atty Atkins confirmed yes, this will need to be done prior to the beginning of phase 3. The locations of the trails and new park were reviewed for the benefit of Board members not familiar with the project. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to approve the request for insignificant change to the Witch Hill Subdivision Decision of January 20, 2005 and the Modification to a Form CSubdivision Decision of March 1, 2012, seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, and Mr. Griset)and none(0) opposed, Mr. Veno abstaining. Wit � , � =.stM' L .x �� pF Project: Application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR),to subdivide Technology Way(existing Lot 723,City of Salem)and to subdivide the adjacent existing Lot 740(KAK Realty Trust), in order to • convey a portion of the existing Technology Way Lot to KAK Realty Trust for future development,and to create a cul-de-sac at the new terminus of Technology Way, under ownership by the City of Salem. Applicant: KAK REALTY TRUST and CITY OF SALEM Location: TECHNOLOGY WAY(Map 7, Parcels 0079 and 0078; Lot 723 on Plan 11802-54; Lot 740 on Plan 11802-61; Lot 724 on Plan 11802-5). Documents and Exhibitions: Roadway Abandonment and Layout Subdivision Plan revised April 15, 2014 Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the co-applicant KAK Realty Trust; the City of Salem is the other co-applicant. Atty Correnti opened the presentation explaining that the City of Salem owns Technology Way and therefore the City is a co-applicant.Technology Way is one lot, which curves through the business park. This ANR request will enable expansion of the businesses located in the business park.The applicant wants to subdivide the street(lot)Technology Way, and move the cul-de-sac to enable expansion of an existing building occupied by Thermal Circuits (owned by KAK Realty Trust). Ultimately a portion of the subdivided street(lot)will be transferred to KAK Realty Trust, in exchange for a new cul-de-sac to be constructed at KAK's expense, and to be carved out of KAK's current lot.The remaining undeveloped portion of the business park is now owned by KAK Realty Trust.The principal of KAK Realty Trust is the owner of anchor tenant Thermal Circuits.The purpose of the project is to enable a multi-million dollar • City of Salem —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June. 5, 2014 Page 3 of 12 • expansion of the building occupied by Thermal Circuits and prepare for future development of the remaining parcel. The ANR plan has already been submitted to Salem City Council to authorize the Mayor to sign the ANR application.The City has approved the project as described including the exchange of the City-owned existing cul-de-sac for KAK Realty Trust-owned land to provide a new cul-de-sac. All of these lots are registered Land Court lots.This plan has been vetted by the Land Court survey department,who has approved the plan as presented here. If endorsement is made by the Planning Board,the project will again appear before the Land Court for the next set of approvals needed. Two subdivisions are proposed: • Divide Technology Way into two parts • Cut the new cul-de-sac out of the big lot owned by KAK Realty Trust • Thermal Circuits will revise their certificate to reduce their frontage to the accurate figure 198- ft.This meets all lot size and frontage requirements for the business park development. Board Discussion: • Mr. Anderson observed there is the potential to land-lock the back portion of the undeveloped parcel (12 acres). Atty Correnti clarified the developer is aware of this potential and is exploring several options to provide access,frontage, and buildable lots. • The Board asked who currently maintains the road Technology Way, which is city-owned. Atty • Correnti offered he understands the city provides maintenance. He confirmed that KAK will be building the new cul-de-sac as part of the agreement with the City. • The Board inquired if the current roadway has granite curbing, asked for assurance this will be continued in the new cul-de-sac. Atty Correnti advised Thermal Circuits will be making a multi- million dollar investment which will likely bring this building expansion back to the Planning Board for approvals. • The Board expressed a favorable view of the project, with Mr. Clarke stating this is the type of development and growth Salem needs. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to endorse a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control(ANR), to subdivide Technology Way(existing Lot 723, City of Salem)and to subdivide the adjacent existing Lot 740(KAK Realty Trust), in order to convey a portion of the existing Technology Way Lot to KAK Realty Trust for future development, and to create a cul-de-sac at the new terminus of Technoloov Way, under ownership by the City of Salem, seconded by Bill Griset. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms.Sides,Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none (0)opposed. ` p� 5{b E " '. h.�k e,�.t sE �.n" �,. h7 sk.w.'fiG` �.`�` Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit,for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. • Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92'/:BOSTON STREET(Map 15, Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) City of Salem— Planning Hoard Meeting Minutes—June 5, 2014 Page 4 of 12 • Documents and Exhibitions: Chairman Puleo disclosed that his firm has hired Griffin Engineering for a small project in Beverly. The state ethics commission recommended his firm file an Appearance of Conflict of Interest(Form 2383) with the Mayor's office,which has been done. Mr. Puleo is getting no special pricing for the services of Griffin Engineering, and Mr. Puleo is still able to vote on this petition without a conflict of interest. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Additional presenters included: Bob Griffin, Griffin Engineering Group LLC, Beverly, MA Romeo Moreira and Alan Buie of Perkins+Will Architects Atty Correnti opened the presentation to advise the Board they have reviewed checklists with planning staff and city departments to ensure all questions are addressed and incorporated into the plan. Mr. Griffin continued the presentation to address the most recent changes.The Board offered comment or requested clarification during his presentation. Highlights include: • Revisions to the landscape plan were identified o Applicant agreed Japanese Maple will be the species and will update the Landscape Plan from "decorative red maple". • Applicant is still discussing the location of generator/HVAC with National Grid. • HVAC enclosure has been formalized on civil and landscape plans; holly will be used for • screening. • Alternate location for the generator/HVAC adjacent the loading dock identified on the plans; subject to final dimensions of the equipment. • Color scheme for exterior materials has been added to the plan. • Fire Department questions regarding snow storage,turning radius and hydrant locations have been addressed. • Mr. Clarke continued to express concern for pedestrian conflict at the entrance circle and the 2 adjacent parking spaces. Mr. Griffin indicated the turning radius is generous and if problems do arise the adjacent parking spaces will be eliminated. • The Board asked if there are designated handicapped spots; Mr. Moreira confirmed yes, the Boston Street lot has 2 spaces. • Mr. Anderson asked if the garage exhaust is mechanical; Mr. Moreira confirmed yes, along the front elevation of the building incorporated into the planter at the front of the building. • Mr. Griset asked about changes regarding snow storage for the upper lot, noting the current plans no longer show snow storage in the middle island of the Boston Street lot; Mr. Griffin indicated new locations in the back corners where the property line jogs.The Fire Department was trying to avoid a large pile in the middle of the parking lot in order to maintain visibility.The Board expressed additional concerns about the new location: o Snow piles melt/refreeze creating ice on the parking lot. Mr. Griffin advised the parking lot will have a 2%pitch, but there may be a need for sand/salt treatment. o Concern the grade drop off at the west end of the site might affect neighbors with snow buildup; Mr. Griffin clarified the immediate abutting yard is level with the Boston Street • City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–June 5, 2014 Page 5 of 12 • lot and the grade will draw the melt to Goodhue Street storm water management drains. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: • Mark Patterson 2 Beaver St,Salem— neighbor with direct view of the Goodhue Street side of the project spoke in favor of the project but voiced one particular concern. Directly across from his property is a 2-story concrete retaining wall. He requested the developer add vines or landscaping to soften it. Mr. Griffin advised they plan to texture the wall and there will be landscaping at the base; the expert opinion is that ivy will not be very effective in screening the concrete.The wall will be segmental blocks,considered to be more aesthetically appealing(not cast-in-place concrete). • Ms. Menon advised there has been a suggestion from the Building Inspector that the area has been a target for graffiti in the past.The Building Inspector recommends a smooth finish with an anti-graffiti coating to enable easy cleaning. • After discussion of both the concrete wall finish and landscaping along the wall,the Board considered the following revisions: 0 5 evergreen trees proposed between the Grove/Beaver Street intersection and the north parking lot will create a screen to hide potential vandals/graffiti;these 5 trees should be changed to deciduous street trees,to provide both a screen but some degree of visibility to the retaining wall. A special condition should be added to the Board's decision that the final species of these five trees shall be approved by the city planner. • o Recognizing a rough surface on the concrete wall could discourage graffiti,the Board was interested to know if the anti-graffiti coating could be successfully applied to a rough finish. o There are some species of climbing plants that could help screen the wall without damaging it–the applicant should look into the feasibility of planting such species. Jim Treadwell 36 Felt Street, Salem; representing the Mack Park Neighborhood Association and Gallows Hill Neighborhood Group—asked about the applicant's contribution to the Grove Street Improvement plan as a mitigation contribution. Per Ms. Menon the applicant agreed to a special condition in the Planning Board's decision stating that the applicant shall pay up to half of the total purchase and installation cost of replacing the traffic signal at the Boston Street/Grove Street/Nichols Street intersection; capped at$60,000.Said mitigation contribution will be applied to replace the existing signal at the Boston Street/Grove Street/Nichols Street intersection,or for other traffic mitigation needs as determined by the city planner. Mr. Treadwell endorsed the mitigation plan on behalf of the neighborhood groups and requested the Board endorse the mitigation before issuing a favorable decision. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to close the public hearing,seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with nine(9)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Veno, and Mr. Griset)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo, alternating with Ms. Menon, read into the record the draft decision.The Board • collectively edited the draft decision, careful to confirm informal agreement on the wording of edits as they worked through each section of the draft decision. The revised landscape plan as submitted by the City of Salem — Planning Board Meeting Minutes—lune S, 2014 Page G of 12 applicant will be included in the decision document. The applicant is required to submit a revised • Landscape Plan to include the following revisions: • 5 Cedar trees between Goodhue parking area and intersection of Grove/Beaver Streets to be replaced with deciduous trees, species to be approved by the City Planner. • "red decorative maple"to be replaced with "Japanese Maple"; • Anti-graffiti coating shall be applied to the concrete wall (Goodhue Street) if feasible, and if not, then the developer shall add ivy or another climbing species at the base of the wall if feasible. • Evergreen holly(not deciduous)will be used in the screening of the HVAC/transformer units. • The six-foot fence at the western property boundary shall terminate even with the corner of the abutting building at 94 Boston Street. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to allow a 6-foot high wood stockade fence as o buffer between the Boston Street narking lot and the abutting residential parcel to the west, granting relief to the 4-foot height limitation of the North River Channel Corridor and the Entrance Corridor Overlay Zones, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Rieder and Mr. Griset)and none(0) opposed; Mr. Veno and Mr. Clarke were ineligible to vote. Motion and Roll Call Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to approve the Site Plan Review application, the Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit with conditions, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Rieder and Mr. Griset) and none (0) opposed; Mr. Veno and Mr. Clarke were ineligible to vote. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. • Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34,Lot 489);23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446;235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions: Site Plans Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion(revised May 20,2014) Renderings from SMMA(North Elevation,West Elevation, Perspectives)dated June 5, 2014 Attorney George Atkins of Ronan, Segal & Harrington, 59 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Other presenters included: • City of Salem —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June S, 2014 Page 7 of 12 • Tony Sasso, Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion, project manager Scott Patrowicz, Patrowicz Land Development Engineering, 14 Brown Street,Salem, MA,civil engineer Kim Hazarvartian of TEPP LLC, Salem, NH,traffic consultant Mark Spalding, SMMA Architects, Cambridge, MA, architect James Emmanuel, RPLA, LEED,James K Emmanuel Associates, Marblehead, MA, landscape architect Peer Reviewers presenting: Bill Ross, New England Civil Engineering, 120 Washington Street, civil engineering peer review Ken Petraglia, BETA Group Inc., Norwood MA,traffic peer review Chairman Puleo read into the record a letter from Atty Atkins outlining the significant changes to the project: • Connecting bridge between the existing and new buildings has been deleted from the plan; • New building is now planned as a 5-story building; • No residential units are proposed for the new building; • Herbert Street Lot is no longer required as no residential units are now part of the expansion; • 10 additional hotel units are being added. Atty Atkins opened the presentation to advise the Board there have been meetings between representatives from the Design Review Board and project architects to make changes, and the parking study has been completed. • Mark Spalding continued the presentation and reviewed the highlights as presented on new renderings: • New building is 67-ft tall,5 stories (higher ceilings on guest room floors). • Continuous canopy added to the front of the building, along the walkway and adjacent the drop- off area. • Gateway feature dimensions and form has been changed to wrap the corner from the waterside onto Congress St to encourage pedestrians and activate this entrance to the harborwalk. • The turret is more integrated into the 2nd floor conference room curtain walls. • Green screen proposed on west end to provide audio and visual screening of the loading dock and trash area. • Eliminating a story of windows makes the building look less massive. Atty Atkins advised the applicant will be working with city's new public art director for ideas regarding the public art to be placed in the turret/gateway feature. Board Discussion and requests for clarification: • The Board responded favorably to the architectural changes; agreed the turret entry at Congress Street is a design improvement and the building appears less massive. • The Board asked to know the planned exterior materials; Mr.Spalding advised the plan provides the vocabulary of a wood clapboard building through use of cementitious clapboard (board and batten appearance) siding on the building, asphalt shingle roofing at the mansard and a base of cast stone to protect the wall.The cast stone base will be darker than other materials but a warm color. • • The Board suggested the glass curtain wall on the waterside of the restaurant have portions that can open. City of Salem — Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June S, 201.4 Page 8 of 12 • The Board asked how each guest room will be heated and/or cooled. Mr.Spalding advised • windows will be operable. A VRF system with roof condensers and in-room units connected by piping not ductwork is planned; including pressurized air into the corridors. No through-wall units will be utilized. Landscape architect James Emmanuel continued the presentation and described updates to the plan: • Removed the Ginkgo tree on Congress Street and replaced with a evergreen shrubs; • Different hardscape on terrace to distinguish from harbor walkway; • Front side of the building no room for trees due to crosswalks and handicapped spaces. • Green screen on west end of the build ing(structure and a plant that will grow on it)to provide screening for abutting condominium owners; • Waterside of the building will feature planters on the granite block wall with breaks to allow the granite to also be a seating wall; • Lighting embedded in the pavement and the wall, and shining down along the terrace and harborwalk; • Mr. Emmanuel offered the opinion that trees cannot be successfully added to the waterfront patio of the building due to limitations in soil volume, and are not compatible with the planned use of the space including umbrellas, etc. Atty Atkins suggested the landscape plan could be approved by the city planning department before a building permit is issued. Board discussion and requests for clarifications: • • The Board noted there is a stipulation that any tree removed on Congress Street must be replaced. • The Board asked to know the plan for trash receptacles throughout the entire site. o Atty Atkins suggested the national parks and other green space entities are evolving their view on providing trash receptacles. o Chapter 91 stipulates how many receptacles are required along the harborwalk. Chapter 91 is clearly requiring benches and receptacles. Board encouraged the applicant to consider types of receptacles and provide for recycling. o Mr. Clarke indicated the Board has the prerogative to require a trash receptacle plan for the site before approving the PUD application. o The proponent's current position is not to provide trash receptacles beyond what is required by Chapter 91. The present sense of some Board members is to link the approval of the new PUD to the entire Pickering Wharf Complex including operations and maintenance standards that were overlooked in the original decision. Having these conditions linked to the PUD decision will enable local reinforcement of Chapter 91 requirements on co-existing stipulations. Atty Atkins continued the presentation with an update on the parking study. Both Kim Hazarvartian (applicant's traffic consultant) and the City's traffic and parking peer reviewer Ken Petraglia made on-site observations last weekend, when the hotel was hosting an event, and was a full capacity. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 5, 2014 Page 9 of 1.2 • Mr. Hazarvartian of TEPP conducted his study on Saturday, May 30, between 3:00-6:OOpm. He counted cars onsite and at the Congress Street lot, with 120 vehicles at peak. This verified the existing use data. Future use plan is 197 cars (without discount for public transportation) in 246 available spaces.The plan provides for 89 on-site spaces plus 157 spaces at the Congress Street lot for a total of 246 spaces. He did not observe any traffic congestion at the Congress/Derby intersection or on-site. BOARD DISCUSSION: • The Board asked for Mr. Hazarvartian's professional observations regarding traffic flow off/on Congress Street. Mr. Hazarvartian answered he saw no cut-through traffic and no congestion or buildup. Golf carts were present and blended in with traffic. He did notice poor pedestrian behavior on-site. Bicycle traffic was very light. • Ms.Yale asked to know who is currently using the Congress Street lot as these visitors to Pickering Wharf will be displaced by future hotel use. Mr. Hazarvartian observed 2 passes for hotel-related vehicles in the lot (paper pass and sticker). He also found boater tags on some vehicles. He reported that the applicant has advised that less than 20 marina members have parking privileges. During the study period the highest count was 40 vehicles in the 157 spaces at the Congress Street lot. • Atty Atkins clarified there are 69 onsite parking spaces onsite for hotel use, plus 157 space in the Congress Street lot for hotel usage, for a total of 226 spaces.The remaining 20 spaces on- site are for condominium use. • The Board observed marina use will continue with the hotel expansion, and asked how they plan to provide for the marina parking. Mr. Hazavartian advised the marina needs were included in • the study and confirmed these users will be at the Congress Street lot. • The Board asked if the entire Congress Street lot is available for use. Mr. Hazavartian advised there are some spaces currently occupied by construction materials/equipment-about 3 spaces —which were included in the 157 count. Traffic peer reviewer Ken Petraglia advised he is generally in agreement with Mr. Hazarvartian. He wanted to be on record saying that the 20% parking demand reduction formula for patrons travelling by public transportation does not apply here. Even without these deductions there are an adequate number of spaces for the project. • Mr. Petraglia's general observations were positive; he took particular note of golf cart drivers who seemed to be well trained. Golf carts generally used the south driveway to/from Congress Street. • He observed no unusual delays at the Congress/Derby intersection. • The queues from Congress Street to turn right onto Derby often blocked the site's north driveway onto Congress Street. • Regarding internal circulation,for the first time the cones that usually block the bank were not there. He did not observe any cut-through traffic or excessive speed. No pedestrian/vehicle conflicts observed on the site. • Noted in the Congress St lot;observed 10 vehicles tagged as boaters(marina guests) and 30 vehicles tagged as hotel guests. • Mr. Petraglia concluded his presentation with two remaining recommendations: City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–June 5, 2014 Page 10 of 12 • Remains convinced the Congress Street south drive should remain 2-way, particularly due to • queues blocking the north driveway; • ADA compliant crosswalk on Congress Street is needed as the hotel will generate more pedestrians to Congress lot.This is an appropriate mitigation contribution from the applicant. BOARD DISCUSSION: • The Board asked if bank spots were utilized; Mr. Petraglia and Mr. Hazavartian both agreed yes, generally 1-2 bank spots in use. Once or twice all 4 spaces were used (bank was open until 3pm). • Mr.Anderson asked if there is room to have 2-way south Congress St drive and entrance dropoff; Mr. Petraglia advised that this would not be the case based on the current plans.The minimum entry drive width for 2-way traffic is 20-feet. • Atty Atkins advised the applicant has been considering the traffic issues raised by the Board.The applicant continues to believe the pedestrian safety issue outweighs the traffic flow concern within the site. • Mr.Anderson offered to the Board the opinion that this is traffic flow on private property and it is not advisable for the Board to stipulate a 2-way drive for the convenience of other merchants in the complex. It would be different if this driveway were a public street. • Mr. Petraglia advised his concern is safety; particularly for those exiting to Derby and turning left onto Derby Street,when Derby is often queued back beyond the site driveway.The idea of the golf carts turning left onto Derby and then left onto Congress also presents safety concerns.The Congress Street north driveway is regularly blocked by the Congress Street/Derby Street light traffic queue, which will push the golf carts to exit onto Derby Street. Golf carts moving against cars (left onto Derby and left again onto Congress) puts passengers in a very exposed situation • at a very busy intersection with multiple lanes of traffic. Cars have less time to react to slower golf carts. • Mr. Rieder offered to the Board the opinion that public safety and traffic are inextricably linked and the issue cannot be framed as a choice in favor of public safety vs. a choice in favor of traffic convenience. • Mr. Clarke offered to the Board the opinion that their role is to ensure an approved PUD integrates smoothly in relation to the entire neighborhood with operations that work for the neighborhood as a whole. It is within the Board's purview to consider how the traffic flows on this private property in relation to this busy intersection. Derby Street is a heavily traveled street that will become even busier with planned development around Salem Wharf. • Mr. Ready explored with Mr. Petraglia his experience with the management of the onsite parking lot by the hotel operators and Mr. Ready thanked Mr. Petraglia for his work, acknowledged his concerns and thanked him for his service to the Board and to the city. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment. • Jim Treadwell 36 Felt Street,Salem—asked if Herbert Street will be coming off the description off the description of this project as it is no longer required. o Mr.Treadwell quoted Zoning Code Section 7.3 regarding planned unit development (PUD),which requires a specific time limit by which construction must begin. He asked if the Board has discussed this detail of the code. Chair Puleo advised no,this has not been discussed. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—lune.5, 2014 Page 11 of 12 • o Mr.Treadwell continued by stating his understanding of the zoning code is that the Congress Street lot must be owned by the developer—not leased. He pointed out that future development along the South River, including the planned dredging of the river above the Congress Street bridge, might result in elimination of this lot. o He reminded the applicant that the PUD parking requirements will take precedent over B5 zoning, and observed that the PUD permits desirable deviations from zoning practices. o He encouraged the Board to require all parking considered for this PUD be under ownership of the developer(not lease)to ensure it will continue to be available to the project. o He observed that the recent parking study was not during peak season; more than a single day might be more appropriate fora project this substantial. o Mr.Treadwell concluded by asking if the developer has presented to the community, specifically the Historic Derby Street Neighborhood Association. If not,encouraged the developer to reach out and invite public input. Atty Atkins advised the Board he will revisit the following issues with the applicant: • Trash receptacles • ADA crosswalk on Congress Street • Reconsider traffic flow within the site Atty Atkins requested the Board be prepared to review a draft decision at the next meeting.The Board • responded by emphasizing there are still significant issues that require resolution in addition to the items identified by Atty Atkins: • Does the Congress Street lot need to be held in ownership. Matt Veno read the code to the Board. Atty Atkins suggested the B5 zone provides guidance as B5 is the underlying zone. Board consensus is to seek advice from the city solicitor. • The traffic flow needs further discussion and consideration. Atty Atkins pressed for a draft decision and offered to provide suggested language to the planning department. He concluded with an appeal for vision; asking the Board not to stipulate narrowly defined conditions that will kill the project. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to continue the public hearing to June 19, 2014,seconded by Randy Clarke.e The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset)and none(0)opposed. Mr. Veno is ineligible to vote on this petition. ,oidyNeW BusIn055 as' a xii'y ?n3 ¢ ; v, No business was discussed. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—June 5, 20.1.4 Page 12 of 12 Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adiourn the meeting, seconded by Bill Griset. The • vote was unanimous with nine (9)in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms Yale Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Mr. Griset and Mr. Veno)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 10:07pm. For actions where the decisions are incorporated by reference into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.salem.com/Pages/Salem MA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 6/19/2014 • =� CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1814 MAY 22 P 12' 00 NOTICE OF MEETING FILE #f CITY CLERK. SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold a special meeting on Thursday,May 29, 2014 at 7.06pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • May 15,2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA • Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a_petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 447);223-231 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST(Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34, Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rigbts under the Open Meeting Law MG.L c. 30A§ 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through 2-2033. This notice posted on "Olfi ialBulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on /YN'9Y' ZZ ZOi� at /L,'" P"Ll in accordance IAGt Chap. 30A, • Sections 18-25. City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board T�ann- aJ Date S / 2 / Zo 14 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email ��8 khv 781 sfz � � �,5 Nb��, I2d l�tiskin�Av. 97� �N� 7uvl Page �f_._..- r City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 29, 2014 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday, May 29,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 29, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:03 pm. iRoll Call ,9 , t� w � � ��:. u 3I �, �ET1s �� M, Those present were: Chuck Puleo,Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Dale Yale, R Randy Clarke and Helen Sides.Absent: Bill Griset. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. �i4pprOVal Of MlriUteS ... a 4sad3 u e':,„�, :.�* ., r Vi t ms`s:, `'� '=sio VI NI �,. May 15,2014 Draft Meeting Minutes No comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Tim Readv made a motion to approve the minute as written, seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 489); 23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446;235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions: Transmittal by Patrowicz Land Development Engineering dated 5/29/2014,including the following revised Site Plans dated 5/20/14: "Aerial View", "Existing Conditions", "PUD Site Area", "Locus:40 Scale", "Parking&Traffic Circulation","Layout Dimensions","Grading (Earthwork)", "Utilities", "Notes&Details", "Details". • Page 1 of 6 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 29, 2014 - Report from BETA Group, Inc dated May 29,2014, Re: "Proposed Salem Waterfront Hotel • Expansion Peer Review of Traffic and Parking Assessment" - Report from New England Civil Engineering Corp dated May 27,2014, Re: "City of Salem RFQ 0-37—On-Call Civil Engineering Support Service,Task Order No. 6—Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion(Congress and Derby Streets),Salem, MA" Chairman Puleo read brief correspondence from Attorney Joseph Correnti stating that he is no longer representing the applicant on this project. Attorney George Atkins of Ronan, Segal & Harrington, 59 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Other presenters included: Tony Sasso, project manager, Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion Scott Patrowicz, Patrowicz Land Development Engineering, 14 Brown Street,civil engineer Kim Hazarvartian of TEPP LLC, Salem, NH,traffic consultant Peer Reviewers presenting: Bill Ross, New England Civil Engineering, 120 Washington Street, civil engineering peer review Ken Petraglia, BETA Group Inc., Norwood MA,traffic peer review Atty Atkins introduced himself and key team members presenting. His introduction also highlighted the extensive history of the project and its direct links to the Salem Harbor Plan.Architects for the applicant have met with representatives from the Design Review Board and the Planning Board;there will be notable design changes,to be presented in detail at a future meeting. Highlights that affect tonight's presentation include: • • Overhead connecting bridge between two wings of hotel will be removed. • Building usage changes include elimination of all 14 residential units that were previously proposed. • Building structure will be reduced to 5 stories (from original 6), and the 5`h floor will have an additional 10 hotel rooms(rather than the 7 residential units originally proposed), for a total of 42 new hotel rooms. • The Herbert Street Lot was a proposed parking solution for the residents of the 14 residential units originally proposed;this is no longer a factor as the residences have been eliminated. TRAFFIC STUDY Atty Atkins advised the applicant's traffic study will be amended with the additional data from a parking count planned for this weekend as hotel is projected 100%and there is a wedding onsite. Updated data will be presented once available. Atty Atkins provided the following key points: • Golf cart usage between hotel and golf carts has been addressed with the Salem Police Department. If vehicles are registered, have license plates, and are insured, they can be used on public streets. • The revised plan provides a total of 246 spaces in the PUD complex including the Congress Street lot and Eastern Bank spaces. • The Municipal garage is expected to be used by event attendees. Page 2 of 6 • S' 1 City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 24, 207.4 • Atty Atkins pointed out the B5 zoning for this site (and Congress Street lot) includes instructive provisions, and quoted: "Nonresidential uses in the B5 District shall not be required to provide off-street parking since the community will accept the responsibility for nonresidential parking in this district."The elimination of the 14 residential units from the new hotel building eliminates the requirement for additional parking spaces. Also,when parking is required, "The parking facility must be less than 1000-ft from the proposed development,the distance to be • measured in a straight line..." both the municipal garage and the Congress Street lot meet the 1,000-foot requirement. Salem traffic peer review presented by Ken Petraglia who identified the following issues: • No analysis was done of the Derby/Congress intersection because the TEPP report assumed the number of additional trips generated will be insignificant. BETA agrees with this. • The proposal to modify the Congress Street drive to one-way inbound will increase traffic through the Derby/Congress intersection by restricting exits to Congress Street, and introduce more pedestrian conflicts on Derby. • Proposal to change direction to one-way outbound (to Derby Street)for the driveway to the east of the existing hotel building produces conflict with no traffic flow advantage. • Overall mobility and traffic circulation would be better if the current traffic flow was kept in place. • Trip generation in the TEPP report was done correctly. The TEPP report proposed that overall trips would be reduced by use of public transit, Mr. Petraglia disagrees with this, but the impact on total trip generation is still not significant. • Board discussion resulted in the following concerns and requests: • Board verified that the parking count planned for this weekend will be peer-reviewed.The Board also suggested that traffic flow through the site and intersection be observed (including any pedestrian conflicts)while the parking count is conducted. • Parking supply must be updated to reflect the revised plan (eliminating Herbert Street lot and the 14 residential units).The total parking supply goes from 285 to 246 spaces. • Use of the Congress Street Lot: o Board asked if the Congress Street lot continues to be available to patrons of other Pickering Wharf businesses or is it limited to only hotel guests. o Mr. Petraglia reported the applicant has a 15-year lease on the lot(renewable) and has control of how it will be used. If this lot is limited to hotel-only, existing users will be displaced which may impact Derby Street as drivers seek alternate parking. o Ms. Menon reported that she had spoken with Captain Brian Gilligan of the Salem Police Department,who stated that as long as the golf carts have license plates issued by the State, the golf carts can be legally operated on the road. The Board pointed out that golf carts would be prohibited from turning left out of the driveway at Congress Street if the direction of the driveway is changed. Mr. Petraglia concluded his presentation with final recommendations: • Parking count be conducted (now planned for this weekend) • Suggested the applicant offer mitigation for the ADA non-compliance of the route from the hotel to the Herbert Street Lot; specifically,the Derby Street crosswalks are ADA non-compliant • Page 3 of 6 City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–May 29, 201.4 • (no curb cuts). Making these crosswalks ADA-compliant might be part of mitigation, and • appropriate as the crosswalks are adjacent the applicant's property. Mr. Sasso addressed the rationale of the proposed changes to internal traffic flow.Traffic has been using the private property roads as a cut-through from Union Street to Congress Street and other drivers trying to avoid the lights at the Derby/Congress intersection.The proposed changes are intended to protect the pedestrians on private property. The hotel will use the bank exit onto Congress Street for the golf carts.The hotel entrance car queue is about 8 cars. Mr. Sasso confirmed that if the Congress Street driveway was used for two-way traffic,there would still be room for a car queue at the hotel entrance. Further Board discussion addressed the following: • Board discussed restricting the driveway east of the existing hotel building onto Derby(one-way outbound)to right-turn on Derby only.This would eliminate some of the pedestrian/traffic queue concerns on Derby Street. • The Board discussed various options for maintaining 2-way traffic on the Congress Street driveway while slowing any potential through-traffic on the site. • Board asked if applicant has any data on accidents/injuries on the private property. Mr. Sasso advised there are no statistics in hand. • Board asked about existing speed tables on the property-they were identified on the plan, one was noted as missing from the submitted plans. • Mr. Sasso affirmed the private driveway directly in front of the existing hotel building will remain two-way; • Atty Atkins observed that the only outstanding issue on this topic is the parking count study. The Board indicated a preferencethat the Congress Street driveway remain two-way.Atty Atkins reminded the Board of the B5 district zoning ordinances that are applicable with regard to parking. Board reminded the applicant a PUD is being requested and supersedes zoning. Mr. Hazarvartian, traffic engineer for the applicant, concluded the traffic study presentation and observed that even if you don't take vehicle reductions for patron use of public transit, the parking spaces required by the proposed building are 197. The applicant is offering a total of 246 spaces between Congress Street lot (157 spaces) and onsite parking at the complex. Board indicated there needs to be a condition in the decision to expressly prohibit use of the Herbert Street lot for PUD purposes. CIVIL ENGINEERING PEER REVIEW Atty Atkins reported that most items from the peer review report were resolved at a recent meeting. Still unresolved is the matter of a 36" drainage pipe under the applicant's property that is connected to the city storm water drainage system (shows on old city maps). The city says Hawthorne Blvd and Charter Street drain through this. There is no record of easement or taking by the city—so if this pipe is in place and in use by the city it is there illegally. The applicant considers the matter of the pipe to be a city issue as the drainage for the property is being addressed differently. The applicant's observations are that there is not enough flow out of the pipe to indicate it is in use. Drain is thought to run under the Page 4 of 6 • r City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes— May 29, 2014 • marina building scheduled for demolition. Needs to be examined by camera and excavated after demolition. Applicant has agreed to meet with whoever is appropriate to get more information. Bill Ross, New England Civil Engineering—previously presented storm water management and utility review on this project. Applicant has requested a change in his review scope; 1) that the storm water management review be presented to the Conservation Commission and 2) the presentation to the Planning Board focus on utilities and connection to city utilities only. Mr. Ross offered the following key points: • Main concern is the drainage 21-inch outfall on Wharf Road/Union Street and the condition of this drainage system—whether it can handle more flow. Applicant has changed flow for the roof and redirected it to the existing 12-inch drainage outfall, to avoid increasing flow to the existing 21-inch outfall serving Union Street. His report includes a recommendation at that the architect confirm that all the roof flow from the new building can be feasibly redirected to the 12-inch drainage outfall. • Mr. Ross raised concern that the sanitary flow from both hotel buildings could be accommodated by an existing 8-inch sewer pipe. The applicant's engineer issued a statement that the existing and proposed sewer pipe to Derby Street can handle the peak flows from the combined (existing and proposed) project. There is no concern for any off-site impacts. • Revised plans no longer offer an extended pipe through the sheet pile to improve the flow of the 36" outfall. This item is pending resolution and there is some difference of opinion of whether the city or the applicant is responsible for fixing it.The pipe cannot be fully explored by camera due to changes in pipe materials and diameter. Mr. Ross indicated the drain clearly • exists and is in use; but the exact location and route of the pipe is unclear. The Board can set a condition that this issue be resolved by negotiation between the city and the applicant. Atty Atkins stated that at one point the city asked the applicant to replace the pipe; the applicant opted to delete the mitigation proposed on the January plan and it was removed. Scott Patrowicz, civil engineer consultant for the applicant, continued the presentation and reported his firm had a productive meeting with city engineers and Bill Ross, resulting in great suggestions which have been incorporated into the revised plan presented tonight. Atty Atkins offered this summary of next steps: • Applicant's architects are meeting with Design Review Board, and redirecting roof flow • New site plan will be presented to the Planning Board on June 5 • Applicant has filed with the Conservation Commission and will be presenting to them in June. After discussion, Mr. Anderson made the following suggestions to the applicant for the revised plans: • Condo parking lot east of the new building is not screened from the new loading area. Mr. Patrowicz advised there is a 2-ft retaining wall.The Board suggested there be fencing or landscape screening so hotel trash pickup would be less visible and audible from the condos. • Turrett gateway feature seems to be incomplete without an obvious purpose. Mr.Anderson asked if it would be illuminated. Suggested they consider installing sculpture or some emblem indicative of the history of the wharf—something to draw people in to the space and activate it. • North face of the new building to the left of the entrance (entrance) seems to be somewhat dead and needs to be activated; suggested the addition of benches and landscaping. Page 5 of 6 City of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 29, 2014 • Requested rough renderings that would show the revised building from several viewpoints: • o Congress/Derby intersection o coming down Hawthorne Blvd o from the existing Pickering Wharf complex Mr. Clarke asked what conditions were in the original 1999 decision regarding maintenance of the current Pickering Wharf walkway; its lighting, landscaping, benches and trash receptacles. Particularly he thought it would be helpful to the Board to know if there were specific conditions attached to the decision that impacted this part of the complex. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: No comments from the public. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to continue the public hearing to Jun 5, 2014, seconded by Randy,Clarke. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. !% Qid�N2W BUSInE55 `w `pro. ., iv!rv�"n,'d.'a.. 19 100,1i1IFT11 i�Tk'f#a�;�'G"�i:cZ={PI Mr. Puleo reported the Jefferson Station apartment complex does not participate in trash recycling. As it is private property this is not a requirement; he wondered if the city can reach out with some encouragement. •djou nr ment' 9y,'" h ZK551 "�r Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adjourn the meeting,seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Ms. Sides Ms. Yale Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at8:45pm. For actions where the decisions are incorporated by reference into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at:http://Www.solem.com/PagesISa/emMA PlonMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 6/5/2014 Page 6 of 6 • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board f �� Date S / I / ac) l 4 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email S�1em 1715 7�5— //.eJ J vnn 1 �Crn'e ►.ad Co mcus� f c� vr-�- SS� S��`c✓1"� c17E3-��`�3c��`-f Y�� ����Q ne� s 'you do 96 � — '� °-1 q-6Q3h dU& ems'&_ I7-70.77 MARC- !s� Page of CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 MAY -8 P 5. 00 FILE r NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK S,�LEM, MaSS You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,May 15, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • May 1,2014 Meeting Minutes 111. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development • , Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34, Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 446); 235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445);CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34, Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE HEARING- DATE TO BE SETA T MAY 15,2014 MEETING Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Ftynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking,landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 'h BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) IN. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT KnoJv our r htr under the O en Meetin Lely d n Cit i Me 0 8 tbrou h -2033. y a p s Mils �dQl�� KQ6'd ot" Q&II uijetin oar " City II, Salem, Mass. o PCO/I at �Oal0/I in accordance ith MOL Chap. 30A, Sectiond 18-25. l_ CITY OF SALEM to PLANNING BOARD 1014 APR 25 A X21 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,May 1,2014 at 7.•OOpm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA G Charles M. Puleo, Chair REVISED MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • April 17,2014 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of a public hearing for Site Plan Review of the proposed redevelopment of the existing building, formerly used as a medical office,into 8 residential units,with associated parking and landscaping. Applicant: ROBERT WILLWERTH Location: 107 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 14,Lot 198) Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST(Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST(Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) • This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board_".' City Hall, Salem, Mass. on 1'�Prr 12d" 491 st ,�22RA/ in accordance.with MdL Chap 30A,. Sections 18-25. . City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for April 17,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 '/z BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Helen Sides reappointment to the City of Salem Community Preservation Committee (CPC) V. ADJOURNMENT Know our fights under the Open Meeting Law MG.L c. 30A 18-25 and Ci y Ordinance 5 2-2028 through§2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW,SALEM.COM he CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS �„•; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning and Community Development DATE: April 24, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting-May 1,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda • ➢ Planner's Memo ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes -April 17, 2014 ➢ Pertinent info from the Salem Harbor Plan (starting on page 108) ➢ Previous Salem Waterfront Hotel Decisions and Amendments ➢ FST/Griffin Engineering Coordination Meeting Notes Materials for the agenda items are included in the packet for the 5/1/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Discussion and Vote-Application of Robert Willwerth for Site Plan Review for the property at 107 Highland Avenue(Map 14,Lot 198). Specifically, the application proposes the redevelopment of the existing building,formerly used as a medical office, into 8 residential units, with associated parking and landscaping. This project was opened at the April 17th meeting. At that meeting it was determined that the applicant would supply the board with the following items at the May Pt meeting: Lighting plan, traffic circulation plan,fence details,curbing detail,color of building, HVAC screening,trash area screening,snow storage area,floor plans (at lease entry and exits to building),landscaping details,and compliance with the Entrance Corridor Overlay District requirements. WE have not received any additional information to date. 2. Discussion and Vote-Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites,LLC for a petition • requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building&the City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—April 14,2014 Page 2 of 2 redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street At the April 17th meeting the board requested that the City provide them with the original decision (please find that attached),provide pertinent sections of the Salem Harbor Plan (see attached),and provide numbers on the use of the City's South Harbor Garage (pending). The board requested the applicant supply the following items at the May 1st meeting:lighting plan for the Harborwalk, HVAC and other roof equipment screening,and more information on the height of the bridge between the two buildings. The Applicant has not provided additional information to date.The City has asked on-call traffic engineering consultant, BETA Group,to prepare a task order for the requested traffic peer review services. Also the City is finalizing the task order with New England Civil Engineering for the engineering peer review services. 3.Discussion and Vote-Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem,Inc.for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 r/s BOSTON STREET(NRCQ.Specifically, the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking,landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. At the April 17th meeting the board asked the applicant to update the site plans accordingly to show • FST's design for the City's Grove Street Improvements project. The applicant's engineer (Griffin Engineering) met with the City's consulting engineers and Board's peer review engineer's (FST) to discuss the City's proposed improvements on Grove Street, as it relates to the PAGS project. FST is reviewing the comments from that coordination meeting(see attached) and will report back to the board at the May 1n meeting. In addition,New England Civil Engineer is expected to present the civil engineering peer review at the May 1st meeting. OLD/NEW BUSINESS ITEMS Helen Sides'term as the City of Salem's Community Preservation Committee (CPC) representative from the Salem Planning Board is expiring on May 16th. The Planning Board needs to approve her reappointment as their representative. • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date Name Mailing Address Phone # Email 7�/ Y3 '?-c? ON 17 t 7� - 5 /�- X1301 y ltao Qan hvffi�.yrva,7. k l' two - f 6G 6s5ey, _781 1 +NM Vw �wTaea�w t'( 3 & Fell Sa�ew 47 Z�t4- (.080 ` e�s4P4M�ao� te a , i !- 176 40 bv VL i Page of City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1, 2014 Page 1 of 7.1. • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday, May 1,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 1, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street,Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:10pm. y aaa 3 i nit s P f�, CaijRki�t ,n..vmu�r� 724t sin Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Randy Clarke, Kirt Rieder, Helen Sides and Bill Griset.Absent: Dale Yale and Ben Anderson. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. -row�. '.Mi nv 3"i'f 3 t �9� :... "��� v£o: ��u�m. '� � � x n��� ApprovalofMinutes � :mss,l 'rt a=u,„-,,,17 ,. d tr,, ry ;,, April 17,2014 Draft Meeting Minutes Revised minutes were approved. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to approve the minutes as written,seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. • Clarke, and Mr. Griset)and none (0)opposed. RegularAgendaE; "((:�r �" s m>,tt, P'h _• ' 1 � ` : 's x,1871 ,, , Project: Continuation of the public hearing for Site Plan Review of the proposed redevelopment of the existing building,formerly used as a medical office,into 8 residential units,with associated parking and landscaping. Applicant: ROBERT WILLWERTH Location: 107 HIGHLAND AVENUE(Map 14, Lot 198) Documents and Exhibitions: Presentation boards with drawings. Handouts to the Board: • "Site Development Permit Plan, 107 Highland Avenue,Salem, Massachusetts—Site Layout Plan" sheet 3, prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, Inc., dated January 13, 2014, last revised April 24, 2014 • "Landscape Plan—Proposed Renovations, 107 Highland Avenue,Salem, Massachusetts" sheet L1, prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated January 23, 2014, and amended by Laura D. Eisner, Northeast Nursery,April 2014 and the associated Plant List • "Landscape Plan—Proposed Renovations, 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts" sheet L1, prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated April 28, 2014 • "Floor Plans—Proposed Renovations" sheet Al and "Elevations—Proposed Renovations" sheets A2 and A3, prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated April 28, 2014 • • Specifications for the "Casa Sierra 58"Tall Black LED Landscape Light" 0 Specifications for the "Bronze 2-Light Motion Sensor Security Light' City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–May 1., 2014 Page 2 of 11 • Specifications for the "Estate' model of Privacy Cedar Panel by Northeastern Fence &Supply • Corporation • Specifications for the "Arrow Newport 10 ft.x 12 ft. Metal Shed" • List of proposed conditions to site plan review special permit Attorney Scott Grover, 27 Congress Street, presented for applicant. Atty. Grover thanked the Board for their input at the April 17, 2014 meeting, and introduced Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey, Associates, Peabody,to present additional information and revisions requested by the Board. Mr. McDowell provided a revised Site Plan revised April 24, 2014 and distributed a package of handouts to the Board. He called attention to the following key concerns that have been addressed: • Added bollard lights at back corners of parking lot to address security concerns. • Concrete pad for trash enclosure has been accurately labeled. • Snow storage areas have been identified and labeled. • Propose one-way traffic circulation flow with signage at each curb cut. • Fence along the back of the lot will continue; material to be white cedar plank which meets the requirements of the overlay district. • Mr. Willwerth retained the services of a landscape designer with Northeast Nursery in Peabody who developed a professional landscape plan for the site, included in the handout package distributed to the Board. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment regarding the engineering presentation • on this project. • Teasie Riley Goggin, 9 Wisteria St,Salem—asked if the trash barrels in the enclosure will be serviced by private contractor or the City of Salem. Mr. McDowell indicated a private contractor will be used. • Tom Furey,36 Dunlap Street, Councillor at Large, Salem—spoke in favor of the project, adding it will be major asset to the neighborhood. Atty Grover continued presentation of the revised Site Plan,and indicated the applicant has a drafted a list of conditions they understand the Board will likely attach to any favorable decision. Additional plan revisions include: • Revised landscape plan: o Larger caliper trees and more planting around the building. o Trees selected for the back property line were selected to provide a canopy screen at a higher level to work with the grade difference. • Exterior building treatment will include removal of vinyl siding and trim, scrape/paint/repair the underlying clapboard and wood trim.The applicant agrees to a condition requiring any replacement use in-kind materials. No exterior color has been selected.The applicant plans to use Waters& Brown as a consultant and will stipulate the color scheme chosen will be historically appropriate. • Mechanical equipment now shown on the revised plan includes 4 condensers on the ground screened by plantings, and 4 on the corners of the decks screened by deck railings. • Parking lot dark corners will be lit with fixtures on bollards 58" high; the remainder of the parking lot will be lit by building-mounted lighting.These bollards are below fence height to light • corners without bleed to abutters; and taller than average to be visible above snow storage. City of Salem–Planning hoard Meeting Minutes–May 1,2014 Page :3 of 1.1. • Discussion between the Board and the applicant's presenters identified the Board's remaining concerns: • Light bollards likely will not survive long as they are in the snow storage area—but this is an operational issue for the developer.A condition is needed to require both building-mounted and bollard lighting must be shielded, and must provide coverage to all parts of the parking lot. • The Board commended the use of a landscape designer and noted the plan is substantially improved. Along Highland Avenue the Board requests 4 red maples (2-2.5 inch caliper) be added as street trees that will provide a sound barrier and shade to the building. • The planned asphalt curbs and paving do not comply with the entrance corridor zoning requirement to use granite curbing. Board offered a compromise and identified specific portions of the curb(along Highland Avenue,around the building)that must be granite.The Board noted that any deviation from zoning will require a waiver. Atty Grover distributed the applicant's draft list of 9 proposed conditions to attach to a favorable decision.The Board accepted this list with the following edits and additions: • 2 red maple(Acer rubrum)trees will be added to the landscape plan, along Highland Avenue on either side of the front entry. These shall be 2-2.5 inch caliper each. • All curbing immediately around the house and adjacent landscaping areas shall be 18-inch granite curb. The curbing along the planting beds on the outside of the parking area shall be 18- inch granite curb from Highland Avenue to the interior corner of the first parking spaces, and then shall be 18" precast concrete curb for the remainder of the on-site curbing. The applicant • shall submit a plan depicting the approved curbing layout to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a building permit. • All lighting shall be shielded from abutters, and the bollard lights at the parking lot, as noted on the submitted plan, shall provide adequate safe lighting of the parking area, must be operational at all times, and shall be maintained in perpetuity,to be enforced by the Building Inspector. • The enclosure for the trash barrels shall be maintained in perpetuity • The signs and pavement markings designating the driveways as"exit only" and "enter only" shall be maintained in perpetuity. • The applicant shall submit a revised site plan to the Planning Department. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for general comment: • John Lundt 6 Greenway Road,Salem, abutter—Spoke strongly in favor of the project. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset)and none(0)opposed. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the Site Plan subject to the agreed-upon list of conditions, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset)and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. • Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to grant a waiver from the granite curbing requirement of Section 8.2.5 Parking Areas in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District of the Salem City of Salem — Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1, 2014 Page 4 of 11. Zoning Ordinance, to allow the curbing on-site to be completed in the manner described • above. The motion was seconded by Bill Griset. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Grised and none (0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Mr. Ready commended the applicant on his outreach efforts with neighbors. �«. u�, ... m2r� Al2 � .. a Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 489);23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446;235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions: • • Powerpoint presentation entitled "Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion—Planned Unit Development&Site Plan Review" prepared by SMMA. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Other presenters included: Susan St Pierre, AICP consulting services, Salem, MA James Emmanuel RPLA, LEED,James K Emmanuel Associates (architects) Bob Griffin, Griffin Engineering Group LLC, Beverly, MA Atty. Correnti reminded the board of the following key points from the initial overview presentation at the April 17 meeting: • What makes up the PUD area; 6 parcels to be treated as one for permitting efficiency,shared utilities and mixed use. • Roadway improvements proposed within the Pickering Wharf development. • City is conducting peer reviews on traffic and civil engineering, results will be presented when available. He also indicated tonight's presentation would provide more background regarding: • how the project fits in with the plans for the South River, the Salem Harbor Plan and waterfront/tidal zone regulations which impact the site. • Landscape architect James Emmanuel will be able to provide some additional detail on landscaping proposed for the project. • it a City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–May 1., 2014 Page .5 of:1.1. • Susan St Pierre continued the presentation to review regulatory conditions along the South River,Salem harbor, and the Salem Harbor Plan and how they interact with this project. It is important to understand the site is located adjacent the South River and the Salem Harborwalk project;the following regulatory entities directly impact its development and use: • Formally Flowed Filled Tidelands defined by a geographic limit at the first public way from the water's edge,which in this case is Derby St.The site is situated on filled tidelands. • 100 Year Flood Hazard Zone is at the water's edge. • Entire site is subject to the Public Waterfront Act, Chapter 91.The state allows a Municipal Harbor Plan to reflect some substitutions and amplifications of use defined in Chapter 91.This flexibility was invoked during the creation of the Salem 2000 Harbor Plan (updated in 2008 with a 10-year effective period). Phase 1 of this project included the waterfront hotel in the Salem Harbor Plan. o Water-dependent use zone along the South River is 20-feet wide per Chapter 91. o Chapter 91 requires a minimum 10-foot wide walkway along the harbor; City of Salem modified its plan to a 20-feet wide walkway. • Salem Harbor Plan as approved includes offsetting public benefits as provided for in Chapter 91: 0 20-feet wide walkway along the water with 10-feet clear and 10-feet that can be used for seasonal outdoor dining. o New building meets public use on ground floor requirement. • Conservation Commission • Combined site (phase 1&phase 2) meets the state Department of Environmental Protection • (DEP) requirements for open space. Ms. St Pierre pointed out some proposed features of the new development that directly meet requirements in the Salem Harbor Plan: • The requested "gateway feature' adjacent the Congress Street Bridge is provided for in the turret feature, calling attention to the Harborwalk. • Will comply with city's request the new development use the same lighting/benches as on the existing walkway on the south side of the South River. During discussion and clarifications,the Board expressed the following concerns: • Board requested more clarification on what portion of the Harborwalk is not being improved— Ms. St. Pierre advised this is the section along the west side of Finz Restaurant because there is not enough room to make improvements to the current walkway. It will connect to the rest of the improved walkway. • There must be a complete waterfront walkway connection from Congress Street to Capt's Bar and Grille. Next STEPS: MEPA and ENF are complete, no additional review required. 2014 project permitting upcoming:Conservation Commission,Chapter 91 license, Planning Board approvals including Flood Hazard District Special Permit. Atty Correnti advised all dwelling units(hotel rooms and residential units)will be located on upper floors;the entire bldg is above the 100-year flood plain. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1, 201.4 Page 6 of 11. Landscape architect James Emmanuel continued the presentation with an overview of the landscape • plan for the project; noting there is not a lot of green space on the site. Highlights include: • Congress Street planting will use Ginkgo trees to fit the narrow space along with evergreens and ornamental grasses. • Brick paving around the building. • Full ADA circulation around the site. • Dining terrace paver will be different from the brick and Harbor Walkway to provide differentiation. • Granite blocks for retaining wall/seating height topped by metal post/chains to distinguish dining terrace. • Steps have integrated lighting; bollard lighting along front, recessed lighting in the vertical face of the granite walls to light stairs/harborwalk. • Flush mounted in-ground lights to define edges of outdoor dining terrace. • Planters on top of granite blocks for seasonal plantings. • Trellis/vines to screen meters on east end of building. Board discussion and critique of the landscape plan: • The Board requested lighting plan to show both existing lighting and proposed lighting; show how the driveway along the east side of the new building will be lit. Include existing condo parking lights, lights on existing building. Please provide full context including minimum foot candles for the harborwalk environment. • For most aspects of the project(not just landscaping)the Board emphasized that future • presentations should show full context including details of existing Pickering Wharf. Renderings/drawings should not be limited to the new building area only. • Board observed that the west end of the new building along Congress Street does is too narrow for trees; there are places to add trees elsewhere on the site.They would prefer to see tree plantings in the outdoor dining terrace rather than an awning.Trees will provide shade and year-round interest—relieve the bleakness of that facade. • The Board asked that the proposed bollard/chain on top of the granite wall (at the edge of the dining terrace) be moved back from the edge of the wall to provide room for pedestrians on the harborwalk to sit on the wall. • Mr. Emmanuel advised the Board that there are underground utilities restricting landscaping along the front entrance to the building. • Board emphatically requested that future presentations (renderings, plans) show how the redevelopment will be handled for the remainder of the property—a before/after view would be most helpful. Details that should be added to the next version of the landscape plan: o Placement of trash receptacles along the length of the harborwalk through the combined Pickering Wharf site (new development plus existing). • Chapter 91 license requires applicant to maintain harborwalk. • The Board indicated more details may be needed on parking once the full traffic study is available. Existing lots(Hebert Street and South Congress Street)are already being utilized by Pickering Wharf residents and visitors and cannot be considered dedicated to the new building. • It is important to check the zoning requirements as they apply to the non-adjacent parking lots. The South Congress Street lot is not owned by the developer but leased from National Grid. Atty Correnti advised this provision of the ordinance has not been invoked as the lot is being shown • as illustrative of available parking—the spaces shown in that lot are not required by zoning. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May.1, 2014 Page 7 of 11 • • Ms. Sides recommended that while review by the Design Review Board (DRB) is not required for this project,the applicant should seek some level of DRB review, as some architectural elements do not appear to be well-integrated (turret,outdoor dining terrace). Atty Correnti agreed that the applicant will work with city staff to schedule time to meet with a few members of the DRB. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for general comment: • Robert McCarthy, 153 Bayview Avenue, Ward 1 Councillor and City Council President, confirmed that the turret feature came out of the Harbor Plan meetings.The resulting Harborwalk Plan is a vast improvement to this area and the city in general.The City needs to address lack of trash receptacles—the National Park Service has removed receptacles on National Park property. • Jim Treadwell-36 Felt Street Salem—encouraged the developer to reach out to neighbors for input.The Harborwalk Implementation Committee seems to be inactive, but they should be reviewing this project.Traffic flow is a substantial concern as there will be more traffic generated by this project.There may be zoning ordinances that affect the Herbert Street lot (screening required to protect residential abutters). He also questioned the "no through traffic" sign on Hebert Street. • Robert McCarthy, 153 Bayview Avenue,Ward 1 Councillor and City Council President advised the "no through traffic" sign is not a legal installation as it is not itemized in the applicable ordinance. • Tom Furey, 36 Dunlap Street, Councillor at Large, Salem—spoke enthusiastically in favor of the project, adding it will be a signature neighborhood on the waterfront. Chairman Puleo summarized the topics the applicant still needs to address at upcoming meetings: Parking Walkway Landscaping Updated renderings Peer review on traffic(to include golf cart usage,current and proposed) Peer review on civil engineering He also reminded the applicant an informal presentation to members of the DRB would be most helpful to the process. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 15,2014, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms.Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none(0)opposed. 'T"i T-'T {i AN s avis s ,. mn s 4 ; rH l' sp 3 . m s ir.+`us s„�„ 'V, +i�,r. s sA '*ETSs e,""�Hi is t s � sh`u.��t. .+. u.0 z~,ui sAtis..aw+�u: t, � :�au?5 ta ' i wa?v`` Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. • Location: 70-92% Boston St(Map 15, Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) City of Salem —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1, 2014 Page 8 of 11 Documents and Exhibitions: • • Site Layout Plan (Sheet C-2) , Grading& Drainage Plan (Sheet C-3), and Utilities Plan (Sheet C-4)- Revised 4/23/2014 • Powerpoint presentation Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Additional presenters included: Bob Griffin, Griffin Engineering Group LLC, Beverly, MA William Ross, consultant utilities and storm water management peer review; New England Civil Engineering Corp., Salem, MA Gary Hebert consultant traffic peer review; Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, Burlington, MA Atty Correnti advised the applicant will be hearing the civil and traffic peer review presentations for the first time tonight and so will not be prepared to respond to the peer review information. Bob Griffin continued the presentation with a brief overview of the most recently revised drawings which incorporate previous Board comments: • Goodhue Street driveway entrance has been coordinated with traffic improvement plan from the city for Goodhue and Beaver Streets. New plan dated 5/1/2014, fencing added to screen mechanical equipment adjacent the cycle shop. Curb dimension details, slight grade and drainage adjustments. The Board expressed a concern regarding the vehicular environment vs. pedestrian at the Goodhue • Street entrance. Pedestrians walking through the driveway to access the area entrance could be hazardous and needs to be addressed. Bill Ross, New England Civil Engineering, presented the peer review of utilities and storm water management(sewer): Project meets storm water management policy on all three key aspects as required: • Pre/post runoff, storm water quantity • Storm water quality • Ground water recharge Key concerns covered in the peer review report: • Pre/post catchment is along the edge of property.The developer must account for flow from Grove Street as well because of topographical contours.They cannot cutoff at the property line. • Found an 8" cast iron drain adjacent Witch City Cycles which appears to extend into the parcel. The drain is not accounted for in the current plan; needs to be researched and addressed. • Infiltration unit for ground water recharge is the main concern; specifically the adjacent building is built into the slope, 22-feet high on Boston Street side and 10-feet on Goodhue Street side. Need information on ground water levels to ensure it doesn't break out onto the road.This issue is driven by elevation change. • Unique site with 11 current water services entering the property and 2 sewers with the possibility there are more. Need to add notes to show how these are all going to be addressed • City of Salem– Planning Board Meeting Minutes–May 1, 2014 Page 9 of 11 • and the requirement that any additional services found during construction be chased to the street as required by the city. • Regarding the sewer connection on Goodhue Street; Mr. Ross has a concern for future paving. He identified a manhole that is not hooked up; it appears to be a backup manhole that needs to be eliminated.The developer's plan needs to be adjusted and re direct flow to another manhole. • Oil/water separator vents need to be shown on the plan. Gary Hebert, Fay, Spofford &Thorndike presented the peer traffic review. His work is for the city(not developer who is piggybacking on the work). Mr. Hebert indicated there are four(4) sources of traffic access to the site: Exit onto Beaver Street Goodhue St for loading/parking= 5%of traffic Boston Street=80-90%of traffic Goodhue Street garage access= 15%of traffic In general,the proposed plan is a good one in the sense that it keeps traffic out of the neighborhoods as much as possible. Highlights and recommendations from the report include: • Mr. Hebert indicated a concern regarding Hanson Street at Boston Street and has recommended the developer relocate the Boston Street driveway to 80-feet east of current location if feasible. In his opinion this is not a deal breaker or a hard recommendation, but re-positioning the • driveway will reduce conflicting left-turn movements from Hansen Street and the site driveway. • Alter driveway designs to indicate sidewalk has right-of-way not the driveways—make it clear pedestrians have the right-of-way. • Goodhue Street will have a bike lane so it is suggested bike storage be provided off Goodhue Street for employees. • Driveways are coordinated with the Grove Street plan.City may create a few parking spaces on south side of Goodhue St opposite Witch City Cycle. • Currently people park on the north side of Boston Street(adjacent to Dunkin Donuts) and pull up onto the sidewalk. The new curb would eliminate the parking on the sidewalk.This is a pinch point on Boston Street. • Grove Street Enhancement Project;the neighborhood is looking for enhanced lighting. Suggest the applicant might make a contribution to this enhancement project relative to what other new developments in the area are contributing. In conclusion, Mr. Hebert indicated it will be another week before the study is complete.The developer's plan is reasonable and can be tweaked. He emphasized bike storage and clear pedestrian right-of-way at all driveways. Mr. Griffin indicated bike storage in the garage is currently in the plan. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for general comment: • Jim Treadwell, 36 Felt Street,Salem, acknowledged Gary Hebert and City Chief Planner Lynn Duncan attended Mack Park Neighborhood Association Meeting to present Grove Street is enhancement update. Pedestrian access at the Goodhue Street entrance needs to be improved. City of Salem — Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1., 2014 Page 10 of 11. o Mr. Griffin advised there is an updated set of basement plans that will show all the • changes that have been discussed. o Board indicated a concern about moving the Boston Street driveway,forcing all traffic into the entry circle. o Mr. Griffin advised they will study this detail more closely and see if there is a way to accommodate the request and manage the entry circle. Atty Correnti indicated the applicant hopes to address final comments from the Board at a lune meeting. Chair asked if the engineering peer review report has been reviewed by the City. Ms. Menon advised the city engineer has not provided formal comment yet, the report is under review. Mr. Ross indicated there are some issues related to DPW valves that need to be reviewed by the city. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 15,2014, seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo. Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset) and none(0)opposed. Qld IVeW BUSIneSS 4'"kH' t4'4 , ( i i 4 ,.�u�;.cf,.�s.h�muabf.,.:.'„a � ".f+wu. 77 Helen Sides reappointment to the City of Salem Community Preservation Committee(CPC). Ms. Sides indicated yes,she is willing to continue the position; the work of the committee is interesting • and worthy. Randy Clarke made a motion to reappoint Helen Sides to the City of Salem Community Preservation Committtee(CPC), seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Griset)and none (0)opposed. Points of information: • Ms. Menon indicated there is a draft ordinance being considered by the city to allow brewery/distillery/winery with tasting room in business zones.A joint public hearing with Planning Board and City Council will have to be scheduled. • Marblehead is hosting a public meeting on design for the lead mills site. It is a joint effort with Salem.Tom Devine in City of Salem planning department is working on this project. • Ms. Menon reported Bertram field new track is supposed to be open to the public. It was temporarily closed because there was a problem with a light fixture.This has been remedied and it should be open to the public. • Traders Way striping hasn't been done yet. 4djOUnm .y.K+:uMXiiH,w.A.,. Maifrf iS - t Y Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adiourn the meeting, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with six(6)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke and Mr. • Griset)and none (0)opposed. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—May 1, 2014 Page 11 of 11 • Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 10:04pm. For actions where the decisions are incorporated by reference into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at:htto://www.salem.coalMaaes/SalemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 5/15/2014 • • 3 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 MAY -9 A 10; 46 FILE # CITY CLER.t(, Site Plan Review Decision 5/9/2014 Robert Willwerth 39 Main Street Saugus, MA 01906 c RE: 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts Site Plan Review On Thursday, April 17, 2014, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing regarding the application of Robert Willwerth under Site Plan Review for the property located at 107 • Highland Avenue (Map 14, Lot 198). The proposed plans show the renovation of the existing building, formerly used as a medical office, into 8 residential units, with associated parking and landscaping. At the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on May 1, 2014 the Board voted by a vote of six (6) in favor (Chuck Puleo, Kirt Rieder, Tim Ready, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, and Bill Griset), none (0) 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 following plans: "Site Development Permit Plan, 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts," prepared by Eastern Land Survey Assoc., Inc., dated October January 13, 2014, including pages 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6; "Site Development Permit Plan, 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts— Site Layout Plan" sheet 3, prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, Inc., dated January 13, 2014 and last revised April 24, 2014; "Elevations, Proposed Renovations, 107 Highland Ave, Salem, Massachusetts" prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated January 23, 2014, including pages Al and A2; and "Landscape Plan— Proposed Renovations, 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts" sheet L1, prepared by Deer Hill Architects,`LLC, dated January 23, 2014, and amended by Laura D. Eisner, Northeast Nursery, April 2014 and the associated Plant List; "Landscape Plan— Proposed Renovations, 107 Highland Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts'' sheet L 1, prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated April 28, 2014; "Floor Plans— Proposed Renovations" sheet A 1 and "Elevations— Proposed Renovations" • sheets A2 and A3, prepared by Deer Hill Architects, LLC, dated April 28, 2014. 1 • 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. 3. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed by the City Planner and if deemed necessary by the City Planner, shall require approval by the Planning Board. 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 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. 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 City Planner, unless deemed an emergency by the Salem Police Department. 5. 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 City Planner prior to construction. 2 • b. A construction traffic/phasing management plan and schedule shall be submitted to the City Planner 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 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. 6. Project Delays The developer,his successors or assigns shall notify the City Planner if work on the site ceases for any reason for a period of six (6)months. In this event, the applicant shall be required to appear before the Planning Board and report to the Board the reason(s) why work has ceased at the project and a schedule of when work will begin again at the site, as well as a date of final project completion. If substantial work has not commenced on the site, as deemed by the Board, and such work is not anticipated to begin within two (2)years of the date of the Planning Board's original decision,the applicant shall notify the Board and, prior to the two-year anniversary of the issuance of the permit, shall request an extension of the permit from the Board. Applicant shall provide in such request any and all materials the Board may require to make a determination on the extension request, including but not limited to: studies, reports or new plans, at the applicant's expense, as requested by the Board and deemed necessary by the City Planner. • 7. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements.of the Salem Fire Department. 8. Signage All proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a sign permit. 9. Building Inspector All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector. 10. Board of Health All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Board of Health, if applicable. 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 certifies that soil and ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. • c. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. 3 . d. 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. e. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. f. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. g. 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. h. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for firefighting. i. 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. j. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. • k. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health. 1. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. m. The developer shall install grease traps,to contain grease in gray water, prior to it entering the city sewer system in developments with 10 or more units and in compliance with the requirements of the City Engineer. n. Salem sits in a Radon Zone 1 and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely high. Therefore, the installation of radon mitigation systems is strongly recommended. 11. Office of the City Engineer The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer. a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department a statement from owner/developer assuming responsibility for all maintenance and repairs required on the existing water service line from the main at Highland Ave. to the property, including the portion that is currently owned by the City, as the developer has decided to reuse the existing line. The City will not be responsible for any future repairs needed on this water service. • b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department the size of the proposed fire service to the building. Please be aware that it will need a tee connection into the main with a triple gate configuration if the service is six-inches or greater. 4 • c. Existing drain system on site shall be cleaned and CCTVed up to the city main in the easement. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with the report, logs and videos of the TV inspection findings, as well as an engineering plan showing the existing drain system on-site and all inverts and bottom of the structure. Please be aware that all catch basins on site shall have a sump of at least four feet. d. Existing sewer service shall be cleaned and CCTVed up to the city main in the easement. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with the report, logs and videos of the TV inspection finding, as well as an engineering plan showing the existing sewer service on-site showing inverts of the connection. 1.2. Department of Public Services The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the Department of Public Services. 13. Utilities Any utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 14. 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 and the City Electrician for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. c. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed by the City Planner, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 15. HVAC Any exposed HVAC unit shall be visually and acoustically screened. 16. Landscaping a. Landscaping shall be completed in accordance with the Landscape Plan marked up by Laura Eisner, Northeast Nurseries, dated April 2014, and the accompanying Plant List. b. Two (2) additional Acer rubrum(Red Maple) trees shall be planted in the two front lawn areas on either side of the front building entrance. These trees shall be 2-2 %"caliper, and shall be planted in line with the two Acer rubrum along Highland Avenue depicted on the Landscape Plan marked up by Laura Eisner, Northeast Nurseries, dated April 2014. The applicant shall submit a plan depicting the approved planting layout, inclusive of the two additional Acer rubrum, to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a building permit. • c. Landscape lights shall be installed at the rear corners of the parking areas in the locations shown as"Proposed Bollard Light"on Sheet 3 of the Site Layout Plan by Eastern Land Survey, revised April 24, 2014 (the revised Site Layout Plan), and according to the specifications for the "Casa Sierra 58.' Tall Black LED Landscape Light"submitted to the Planning Board on 5 • May 1, 2014. These lights,shall provide adequate safe lighting of the parking area, must not cast any light or glare onto adjacent properties,must be operational at all times and shall be maintained in perpetuity,to.be enforced by the Building Inspector. d. Building mounted light fixtures shall be installed in the locations shown on.the Landscape Plan by Deer Hill Associates dated January 23, 2014, and according to the specifications for the "Bronze 2-Light Motion Sensor Security Light" submitted to the Planning Board on May L 2014. There shall be shielding on the lights affixed to the exterior of the building, to prevent illumination or glare at adjacent properties. e. A white cedar fence to be installed in the location shown on the revised Landscape Plan prepared by Deer Hill Architects, dated April 28, 2014; and according to the specifications for the "Estate" model of Privacy Cedar Panel by Northeastern Fence& Supply Corporation, submitted to the Planning Board on May 1, 2014, and in compliance with the height limitations of the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. f. An enclosure for trash barrels to be installed in the location shown on Sheet 3 of the Site Layout Plan by Eastern Land Survey, revised April 24, 2014 (the revised Site Layout Plan), and according to the specifications for the"Arrow Newport 10 ft. x 12 ft. Metal Shed" submitted to the Planning Board on May 1, 2014. This enclosure shall be maintained in perpetuity. g. Mechanical equipment to be installed in the locations shown on the revised Landscape Plan and • Elevations (sheets Ll, A2, and A3)prepared by Deer Hill Architects, dated April 28, 2014. h. Snow storage areas to be provided in.the locations shown on the revised Site Layout Plan, sheet No. 3,prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, Inc., revised April 24, 2014. i. Signs and pavement markings designation the driveways as "Exit Only" and "Enter Only" to be installed in the locations shown on the revised Site Layout Plan, sheet No. 3, prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, Inc., revised April 24, 2014, and shall be maintained in perpetuity. j. The existing vinyl siding shall be removed and the entire structure shall be repainted with historically appropriate colors. Any architectural details that require replacement such as trim and clapboards will be replaced with materials of a like kind. k. The Board unanimously voted to grant a waiver from Section 8.2.5 Purking,4reas in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District of the Salem Zoning Ordinance requiring plant beds to be bounded with six-inch granite curbing,to allow the curbing on-site to be laid out in the following manner: all curbing immediately around the house and adjacent landscaping areas. shall be 18-inch granite curb. The curbing along the planting beds on the outside of the parking area shall be 18-inch granite curb from Highland Avenue to the interior comer of the first parking spaces, and then shall be 18" precast concrete curb for the remainder of the on-site curbing. The Board's waiver is based on the following: • • Granite curbing is required in the portions of the site which are most visible from the street. 6 • • Given the size and scope of the proposed project,requiring granite curbing around the entirety of the plant beds on-site would be an undue burden and would serve no public purpose. The applicant shall submit a plan depicting the approved curbing layout to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a building permit. 17. Maintenance a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 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. 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 the Department of Public Services prior to the issuance of the final Certificate 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 the final Certificate of Occupancy. A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the.City Engineer. 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 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 tiled, 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 7 7N x ` 0 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,April 17, 2014 at 7t00pm at City Hall Anner, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, NIA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL n II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES < e • April 3,2014 Meering Minutes M m v III. REGULAR AGENDA > o n Item: Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regard � the proposed amendments to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 8.1.2.j�;a) to update Flood Hazard District Boundaries, and Base Flood Elevati�i' and Cy- Floodway Data to incorporate the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels updated on Judy 16, 2014. Project: A public hearing fora waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots, each with less than the required minimum frontage. Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR) Applicant: PETER K. HANl"ZOPOULOS Location: 13 CHERRY HILL AVENUE (Map 14,Lot 225) Project: A public hearing fora petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-sire parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONTHOTEL&SUITES,LI..0 Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (tNiap 34,Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST QvIap 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST(Map 35,Lot 321); 25 PEABODY ST(Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF 0 PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST(Map 34,Lot 408) City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for April 17, 2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 Project: Continuation of the public hearing fora petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flymttan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 /2 BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) Project: A public hearing for Site Plan Review of the proposed redevelopment of the existing building, formerly used as a medical office,into 8 residential units,with associated parking and landscaping. Applicant: ROBERT WILLWERTH Location: 107 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 14,Lot 198) Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change, minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration, modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements, and enlargement of courtyard area. Applicant: OLD SALEM JAIL VENTURES, LLC Location: 50 SP. PETER STREET (nfap 35,Lot 179) Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review, . Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, North River Canal Corridor • Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit, to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL,LLC Location: 28 GOODHUE STREET (Map 16,Lot 372) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rights ander The Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A fi 18-25 and 00 Ordinance J 2-2028 through J 2-2033. This notice posted on "Offici Bulletin Board" ,t City Hall, Salem, Mass. on C� /d .2d/ T at S.a�p�7 in accordance ith MGL 6hap. 30A, Sections 18-25. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSE'1TS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 W WWSALENLCOM ` ���ONOITggQ� CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ]. • a44' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND Wlav COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 4 FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Dana Menon, Staff Planner DATE: April 14,2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting—April 17, 2014 Please find the following in your packet: Agenda ➢ Planner's Memo • ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes -April 3, 2014 Materials for the agenda items are included in the packet for the 4/17/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Discussion&vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendments to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 8.1.2.2 (a) to update Flood Hazard District Boundaries, and Base Flood Elevation and Floodway Data to incorporate the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels updated on July 16, 2014. On Wednesday,April 1&1, the Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing with the City Council (at Council Chambers),where this issue will be introduced. The issue is then referred to the Planning Board for discussion and to vote a recommendation to City Council on the proposed Ordinance amendment at the Board's meeting on April 17t'. The Planning Department will provide the Board with a draft recommendation at the meeting on the 17th. Lynn Duncan,Director,sent additional materials on the FEMA map updates to Board members by e-mail on April 10th. If you have any further questions,please contact Lynn. 2. Discussion and Vote—Request of Peter K. Hantzopoulos for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots,each with less than the required minimum frontage. Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR),for the property located at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue (Map 14, Lot 225). • The applicant submitted an application for an ANR plan and an application for a Waiver from Frontage. The ANR cannot be approved without approval of the Waiver from Frontage. City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—April 14,2014 Page 2 of 3 • On January 29,2014 The Zoning Board of Appeals issued a Decision granting Variances from the minimum required lot area, the minimum required lot frontage, and the minimum required lot width for the creation of two lots out of the existing lot at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue. A copy of that Decision, along with the application materials,is enclosed under Attachment A. 3. Discussion and Vote—Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites, LLC for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parldng at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. This project was submitted at the end of January,and at the February 20th meeting the petitioner requested to open the hearing,but not to present any evidence,and to continue the hearing to the April 3,2014 Planning Board meeting. At the April 3,2014 Planning Board meeting, the applicant requested to continue the public hearing to the April 17�h meeting, due to the fact that the Board was down four members at the April 3h8 meeting. The petitioner proposes to demolish the existing Marina building and construct a second building to be part of the Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites. They propose to augment on-site parking with satellite parking in two off-site lots: 25 Peabody Street and 13-15 Herbert Street. The submitted plan and detail sheets do not show the required upgrades to the existing Harborwalk in Pickering Wharf, specifically the sections along the hotel expansion site and from Finz to Victoria Station. These improvements are described in the Environmental Impact Statement submitted to the Board,pages • 11-15. These upgrades are required by DEP under the Chapter 91 Waterways licensing for the project, because of the substitutions and allowances that were afforded to the Waterfront Hotel through the Salem Harbor Plan Update process. The upgrades must comply with the City's specific Harborwalk standards (as executed in the recently completed section of the Harborwalk). Attachment A is an excerpt from the Salem Harbor Plan Update,which discusses these requirements. It is important to note that the walkway is required to be a"full, clear ten feet"in width. It appears that the Harborwalk at Congress Street is less than 10'wide, as the rail on the Congress St Bridge and the proposed hotel turret create a pinch-point in the walkway. 4. Discussion and Vote—Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 '/:BOSTON STREET (NRCC). Specifically,the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parling, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. This will be a continuation of the hearing on this application. The hearing was opened at the February 20, 2014 meeting. The Board voted to refer the applicant to the DRB for review. At their March 26th meeting, the DRB recommended the project for approval,with conditions. Please find the DRB's Memorandum on their recommendattons under Attachment B. 5. Discussion and Vote—Application of Robert Willwerth for Site Plan Review for the property at 107 Highland Avenue (Map 14,Lot 198). Specifically,the application proposes the redevelopment of the existing building,formerly used as a medical office,into 8 residential units,with associated parling and landscaping. • City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—April 14, 2014 Page 3 of 3 ' 6. Discussion and Vote—Request of Old Salem Jail Ventures, LLC for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change,minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration,modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements, and enlargement of courtyard area, for the property located at 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35, Lot 179). The applicant has submitted a copy of the previously approved plan and a copy of the proposed plan for your review,as well as a brief description of the changes to the previously approved plan. These documents were attached to the emailed memo for the April 3hd meeting. The applicant has now also submitted revised renderings of the propose building facades, a revised landscape plan, and a plan highlighting the changes from the previously approved plan. These are included under Attachment C. The applicant is also obtaining a letter from the Salem Fire Department,which they will bring to the meeting. This proposal has already gone before the DRB and the SRA.The SRA decision was also included in the emailed memo for the April 3,d meeting. 7. Discussion and Vote—Request of North River Canal, LLC for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit,to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway,for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street(Map 16,Lot 372). This project was heard at the previous Planning Board meeting,on April 3hd. The Board decided that it • would be best to seek the input of the Design Review Board,and recommended that the applicant submit a new proposal for a vehicular barrier for review by the DRB/representative members of the DRB. As of the writing of this memo, the Planning Department has not received any new materials from the applicant. Should any new materials be submitted in time for review,they will be provided to the Planning Board when they are received. As this project may be continued at the April 17th meeting, any Board members who missed the April 3hd meeting should listen to the audio and review the draft minutes from the April 3hd meeting. You must then sign an affidavit stating that you have performed these duties. I will bring affidavits for your signature to the meeting. • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board kL -nl Date Name Mailing Address PhoneB#^ X36 Email Cie S ::,Ts- 64l ��9 /�• 5ico2Ci/ �eJ �G;?-��3-r� �7T— co✓7 '))8 915: ud) cf f -7f1-N&O 19 a iZ�IrnSt1�G(` 'aS � 9'18•�4�}•6080 �rtr�aas4'� �'"��•ca� -316 F�►tst s. �M " is �s c id �i � vl��✓ .lYo.�J �I ��'� 7��� 7336 i Page of CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of ROBERT WILLWERTH for Site Plan Review for the property located at 107 HIGHLAND AVENUE (Map 14, Lot 198). Specifically, the application proposes the redevelopment of the existing building, formerly used as a medical office, into 8 residential units, with associated parking and landscaping. The public hearing will be held on Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington Street, 3`a floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department • of Planning & Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: April 3 and April 10, 2014 Know Your Fights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A g 18-25 and City Ordinance g 2-2028 through 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM,COM l City of Sa!e n--Planning Roard Meering Minutes--April 17, 2014 Page i of 1.9 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,April 17,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,April 17, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:05 pm. ip , . `ROTI Call .rz.ikduY, uii? i~>�s i " } aa"p"N itax '° w `Wla . o �Ian.. +wae.Itrs«S r»Sa » » Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Randy Clarke, Dale Yale, Helen Sides and Bill Griset. Absent: No members were absent. Also present: Dana Menon,Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. i x as w t k »n rezw_ Approval of Minutes @+ a aii t a 1 r & + a "y+ + +�=341v + 45wu�i�a3,4�� wha�+rQa�bz'E. ++ua diu�"F-,k°ws+aru�ai.1;?,ais,•,,..� April 3, 2014 Draft Meeting Minutes Mr. Rieder identified on p7 last paragraph in Old/New Business, reference to lane striping should read on Norman Street adjacent the Post Office. • Mr. Puleo identified on p7, next to last paragraph in Old/New Business,the Fire Department needs to provide a written review indicating they are able to access all buildings on the site at St. Peter's Street. Motion and Vote: Kirt Rieder made a motion to approve the minutes as revised, seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with five (S)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder) and none (0)opposed _z_ -u.. ibit'S. i e t a §`k r— a aaNY. "+"HfttN'+vnegary no-a: ar Regular Agenda a" ga a r r .Fu d,CLh„i Item: Discussion and vote on a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendments to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 8.1.2.2 (a) to update Flood Hazard District Boundaries,and Base Flood Elevation and Floodway Data to incorporate the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels updated on July 16, 2014. Members agreed to discuss their recommendation and vote during New Business. ir+a iu4E ami i4 11tt9# � ffiSYua9+�{3 h 'k h i'lw -�?3. Project: A public hearing for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots,each with less than the required minimum frontage. Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR). • Applicant: PETER K HANTZOPOULOS Location: 13 Cherry Hill Avenue (Map 14, Lot 225) Cit; of Salem—Planning BoarcJ Meeting Mlinutes—APril 17, 2014 Mage 2 of 19 Attorney John Keilty 40 Lowell St, Peabody, presented on behalf of the applicant. Atty Keilty advised that the Zoning Board of Appeals has issued a decision; the applicant is now seeking a waiver from the minimum frontage requirement and signed approval of the ANR site plan. Atty Keilty provided a brief history of the site and circumstances behind the variance.Applicant bought the site about 40+years ago.The property remained in one name, zone changes occurred. Originally there were three lots purchased in the 1960s that were formally merged into one lot.The applicant was issued a variance to sub-divide again, creating two lots. All 3 original lots are bigger than most lots on Cherry Hill Avenue; most of which were developed based on a 1928 site plan predominately 5,000 sf. The applicant's proposed two lots are in excess of 11,000 sf. Zoning Board of Appeals has approved their requested variances; applicant is now before the Planning Board with a request for a frontage waiver and approval of the ANR site plan. Mr. Puleo clarified the proposed plan is for 3 lots becoming 2 lots more or less evenly split. Atty Kelty confirmed. Mr. Puleo observed there were no restrictions placed on the variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals; Atty Keilty confirmed. PP Y Y Mr. Ready suggested the Chair open for public comment. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment: Teasie Riley Goggins, 9 Wisteria Street asked where is Cherry Hill Avenue and where are these lots located?Atty Kelty advised access is from Highland Avenue in the Witchcraft Heights neighborhood. Motion and Vote: Tim Ready made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Ms. Yale, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Griset, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to approve the waiver from frontage special permit request and approve the site plan ANR, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with eight(8) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder) and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Rm�,J tiry..,. iw�idgd..ww Na3®an�n NOR` O' ` .. rP, ' nBu, ,-. .<, Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 489);23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446;235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); City of Salem— Panning Board. Moetin, NVnutos—April 17, 2014 Page x of 9 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) Documents and Exhibitions: Slide presentation of Phase 2 of Salem Waterfront Hotel Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant. Atty Correnti provided an introduction reminding the board a Phase 2 of this development was referenced during Phase 1 presentations and permit approval in 1999.The Phase 1 plan decision specifically referenced Phase 2 to be developed. He emphasized this is an overview of Phase 2, covering development on a portion of Pickering Wharf. Phase 2 involves more than the addition of hotel rooms, offering mixed use to maximize utility and value of the associated parcels encompassing approximately 87,000 sf. The project will add new marina facilities, a restaurant, residences and a conference center.The presentation will show where the adjacent parking is located and how it supports Phase 2. Team Introductions: Michael Rockett, President of Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites Tony Sasso, Project Manager at the hotel Scott Patrowicz, Principal at Patrowicz Land Development Engineering (civil engineer) Steven Vincent,AIA LEED, SMMA(architect) Kim Hazarvartian of TEPP LLC, Salem, NH,traffic consultant Susan St Pierre,AICP, Susan St Pierre Consulting Services(water permitting issues) James Emmanuel, RPLA, LEED,James K Emmanuel Associates(landscape architect) Atty Correnti summarized the 3 issues before the Planning Board: Site Plan Review Planned Unit Development(PUD) Special Permit Flood Hazard District Special Permit Tony Sasso continued the presentation, explaining his role is-to coordinate consultants. Mr.Sasso reminded the Board that Phase 2 as presented during Phase 1 development included the concept of a convention area addition to the hotel. Some of the Phase 2 delays that took place after the 1999 Planning Board decision involved appeals; the hotel finally opened in 2004.The plan was to extend the hotel in 2007. The Harbor Plan adopted by Salem in 2008 (South Commercial Area) and related public hearings were all part of the process in conceiving and creating the plans for Phase 2. Phase 2 was further delayed by the death of a principal (Mr.J. Hilary Rockett,Sr.) and related estate litigation, and the downturn of the economy during this period.These matters have been addressed and the team is happy to be in a position to move forward with Phase 2 and provide the Planning Board with an overview of the plan. Atty Correnti and civil engineer Scott Patrowicz continued the presentation with a review of photos and drawings to explain the site layout. Key elements identified for the Board: • Aerial photo of the PUD area used to identify: o Old marina building to be demolished and adjacent parking on the waterfront is where the new building will be constructed. o Existing Eastern Bank remains. o Existing hotel parking lot will remain and will be expanded. City of Salem--Planning Board Meeting I\Ahcutos—April 17, 203.4 Page 4 of 1.9 o Existing parking lot south of Congress Street Bridge remains; it is currently very under- utilized. o Identified location of Herbert St and the lot location which is available to the Pickering Wharf entities and will be utilized; it is a short walk from the existing hotel. Mr. Puleo asked if this lot is currently utilized for this?Atty Correnti affirmed it is. • Mr. Patrowicz reviewed the next slide, a drawing of existing conditions. He pointed out key buildings (existing marina, South River, Finz Restaurant, existing hotel, Eastern Bank, Pickering Wharf shops and existing condos with their parking) and surrounding streets. Slide 3 shows PUD site area.The underlying zoning for the wharf is B5,this lot eligible for B5 and PUD treatment: o PUD area has 3 main structures on 6 parcels of land; each parcel has interior lot lines. It is significantly more efficient and simpler to treat the PUD as one area rather than submit a complex set of individual requests for relief that could be required by the varied lots/parcels. o Access to streets and utilities across the PUD area are all shared.The developer is treating this as one entity which allows for a more uniform treatment of landscaping and design across the PUD. o Mr. Puleo asked if the original hotel building was a PUD?Atty Correnti advised no, it was it was a Site Plan Review for a B5, parcel (parcel 1A). Eastern Bank is a separate parcel and a tenant of Pickering Wharf. • Atty Correnti resumed the presentation and advised that PUD ordinance requirements are met. The developer believes they meet both the letter and spirit of PUD requirements: • Square footage (site area of 87,832 sf meets requirements, minimum 60,000 sf) Mixture of uses(hotel, residential, bank, marina and retail) Underlying zoning needs to be eligible; B5 zone is eligible for PUD. Meets height limitation of B5 zone (70 ft); new hotel wing proposed to be 69 ft(existing hotel is 63 ft) o Mr. Puleo asked if the existing hotel height includes the cupola?Atty Correnti advised no, the cupola may not be counted to meet zoning height requirements.There was lengthy discussion regarding the roof line and dormers of the existing hotel during the site review. Mr. Patrowicz took over the presentation to review utilities, significant improvements include: • Extending the water main to create a looped system which will improve water pressure and flow for the entire complex. • Storm scepter will be installed to handle oils/greases from parking lot; catch basins will be deep- sup stations with hoods. • New building will replace dirty parking lot water for roof water(cleaner). • Utilize an existing private drain line out-falling to an existing discharge point; eliminates a point discharge into the South River. • Sewer will utilize existing main which was planned in 1999, feeds into the main trunk line. Board follow-up questions and discussions regarding proposed changes to utilities: • Mr. Puleo asked about existing seawall,anything needs to be done? Mr. Patrowicz showed location of old granite wall and sheet pile wall which will stay.An extension of the harbor walkway (Harbor Plan)will be added over the sheet pile wall, and will be reviewed later by the architect. Mr. Puleo summarized there no proposed reconstruction of seawall. Mr. Patrowicz affirmed this is correct. City of yalern—Plannin,o Board Meeting Minutes—April 17, 2014 Page 5 of 1.9 • Mr. Clarke asked about discharge point, route was shown by Mr. Patrowicz using the drawings.The existing catch basin in parking lot that drains through the sheet pile wall is being removed. Mr. Clarke pointed out a specific intersection which floods regularly. o Mr. Sasso advised the specific location of the flood problem is Union Street and city property. City Council recently voted 11-0 in favor ofdiscontinuing this portion of Union Street to enable the developer to purchase. It's outside the PUD, must be fixed once it becomes part of Pickering Wharf. Atty Correnti and Mr.Sasso affirmed that once this part of Union Street becomes private property the owner will fix the problem. • Atty Correnti concluded the utilities portion of the presentation. The developer is also going to the Conservation Commission as part of permitting process to seek an order of conditions. o Mr. Patrowicz observed it is all impervious surface now, the proposed plan adds a small amount of landscaping which will help. Roof runoff instead of parking lot storm water will also help storm water management. o Atty Correnti mentioned the Harbor Plan contemplates construction of this building (new proposed hotel building) on this site with this configuration, and accounts for it in the harbor plan.The applicant is not presenting any new development here that hasn't been seen and previously referenced. Kim Hazarvartian,Traffic Consultant fromf TEPP LLP,Salem, NH, continued the presentation, advising • the firm had looked at current circulation, parking and traffic. He described the existing conditions that will change: • Two-way driveway at Congress St becomes one-way inbound (excepting limited use for outbound from Eastern Bank drive-thru), continuing to Wharf Road and Union St as a one-way street. • Two-way on Derby Street west of the existing hotel stays a two-day driveway. • Current access driveway inbound from Derby St becomes outbound (east of the existing hotel) Board follow-up questions and discussions regarding proposed changes to traffic flow: • Mr. Rieder asked if drivers will still be able to drive on the east side of Eastern Bank (drive-thru teller)and turn left onto Congress St.the Traffic Consultant affirmed yes. • Mr. Clarke advised that current practice by hotel staff is to provide staff to control the driveway in front of the hotel onto Derby St, limiting use to outbound only and blocks non-hotel people from using this entrance. Mr.Sasso stated this practice has been discontinued; advised the Fire Department does not allow it. • General discussion acknowledged the difference between hard construction and operational usage. • Mr. Puleo asked Mr. Hazarvartian to describe traffic flow to new building: o Consultant advised this is an operational question. o Mr. Sasso explained; main lobby moves to front of new building (no longer existing building) with a drop off area in front. Inbound traffic will enter from Congress or Derby St and flows to new drop-off area. Self-park available at 83+14 spaces. Becomes an operational issue if there is a large event,valet parking will be offered based on • expected volume. Hotel will use golf carts to ferry hotel guests to/from non-contiguous lots on Herbert Street and across the Congress Street bridge. City of Salern—Planning Board Nlee ting MiinUtes—April 17, ?014 Page J of 19 • • Ms.Yale asked to know the capacity of the planned convention/conference center. Mr. Sasso advised 300 guests. • Mr. Rieder asked for clarification regarding cross-hatched area on drawings near the new hotel entrance. Mr. Sasso advised this is valet only. An additional 14 spots will be created in front of the existing hotel building when the portcochere is demolished. • Mr. Griset asked for clarification on the golf cart usage—are they being used on public streets? Mr. Sasso confirmed yes, they have license plates (registered and insured).The hotel currently has 2 carts. Pickering Wharf has 157 spaces at South Congress Street location with the ability to move guests via golf carts. • Mr. Clarke clarified that every car must exit onto Derby St unless they sneak through Eastern Bank drive-thru. Mr. Sasso affirmed this is correct. • Mr. Clarke recommended the applicant provide firm counts on current flows (in/outbound) on both the Congress St driveway and Derby St driveway. • Mr. Hazarvartian offered the opinion that the overall site flow will not have much change in overall traffic numbers, only a shift in circulation. • Mr. Clarke noted that the overall volume may not change significantly but in such a congested urban area, there will be significant impact on traffic flow at a major downtown intersection (Congress& Derby Sts) depending on the in/out flows to the site. • Mr. Puleo asked how many spaces in South Congress St parking lot, pointed out not all are usable at this time. Mr. Sasso advised there are 157 spaces there, some spaces temporarily unavailable because the lot is currently under-utilized.There are an additional 39 spaces at the Herbert St lot. 14 existing spaces will be demolished to make way for the new building, and 14 added back to hotel area (when portcochere demolished). • Ms. Sides asked to know Eastern Bank parking capacity as this is a very busy bank that regularly exceeds their allotted parking. Mr. Sasso advised there will be 3 regular spaces and 1 handicapped space in front of the bank, reducing their handicapped from 2 to 1 space based on an analysis.Their lease is limited to 4 spaces. Mr. Rieder asked where the closest handicapped spaces are located in relation to the hotel. Mr. Hazarvartian advised there are 4 public spaces at the corner adjacent the hotel. Mr. Hazarvartian resumed presentation with a slide to highlight parking: 281 total spaces: 157 at South Congress Street lot 85 adjacent the hotel 39 at Herbert Street lot • Mr. Clarke stated the Board and the public need a full traffic analysis of this project. This presentation is incomplete and does not present all the needed facts of current circulation at this very important intersection. Mr. Hazarvartian continued presentation with a slide showing the Congress/Derby intersection photo to demonstrate recent improvements to the intersection: • Signalized and right-turn lane added from South Congress onto Derby St. • Trip generation calculations done to compare the existing conditions and traffic generated by the new buildings.The numbers were low; leading him to conclude that because the area is largely built-up already; traffic conditions will not notably change. Board follow-up questions and discussions regarding proposed changes to traffic flow: • Mr. Puleo suggested traffic metrics for the existing residences and the impact of adding more residences are a factor for consideration. Ury of Salem— Planning Board Meeting Minutes--April 17, 2914 Page 7 of 19 • Mr. Rieder agreed with Mr. Clarke's request—the overall volume may appear below a statistical threshold requiring a full traffic analysis, but for those who live here this is a hot spot and a major intersection that affects Salem residents and residents of adjacent communities who use travel through this intersection daily. Architect Steven Vincent of SMMA continued the presentation to provide a broad overview of the new building plan and program.The siting of the building was determined a number of years ago with the permitting of Phase 1. The new building program has 4 elements: restaurant,function space, hotel rooms and residences. Public space on floors 1-2 (restaurant/bar/kitchen, lobby and residential entry for residences); hotel rooms on floors 3-4, and residences will be located on floors 5-6. Social functions will be a strong business driver.The new hotel will be positioned as an upscale boutique social facility. Massing is more articulated and descriptive to signal upscale. A rendering from the bridge (SE view) shows a gateway/turret as part of Harborwalk Plan,which will include art installations. Restaurant will include an outdoor dining terrace to activate the Harborwalk. The ballroom will be located on the 2"d floor with views of the water. Mr.Vincent described the first floor:the lobby looks toward Eastern Bank with larger more contemporary windows on this floor. There will be some transparency from the lobby through to the water. Marina services will also be located on the first floor. Board follow-up questions and discussions regarding overall architecture and building program: • Mr. Puleo asked what function will occupy the first floor at the Congress Street end? Mr.Vincent advised this will be the residential entry and mechanical. Mr. Puleo observed the view of the water/boats from the downtown/Derby Street/Congress Street bridge perspectives will be blocked by the proposed building footprint. • Mr. Puleo asked if the existing marina access remains. Mr.Vicent affirmed yes, noting there is a grade change along the waterside from the Congress Street Bridge to Finz Bar&Grille. Prompted b Mr. Puleo he confirmed the Harborwalk extension will connect to the existing walk P Y g adjacent to the Finz location continuing to the Congress Street Bridge. • Mr. Clarke asked about a lighting plan and was advised it will be presented at future appearances before the Board. He expressed a concern that the existing Harborwalk from Finz to Capt's Bar&Grille is very poorly lit and maintained. Mr.Vincent continued the architectural overview with a rendering of the North Elevation.This view of the entrance/front facade shows a symmetrical building, contemporary windows, cementitious clapboard, dormers and cupola. A South Elevation rendering shows the terrace on first floor for outdoor dining. Mr.Vincent next presented a rendering of the East Elevation (Pickering Wharf) showing the bridge to the existing hotel (from NE corner of new building).The east end is the service entry for building.The Fire Department has indicated a 12-ft clearance is required under the bridge connector, which has been accommodated. A North Elevation rendering shows the residence entry. Board follow-up questions and discussions regarding overall architecture and building program: • Ms. Yale asked about use of existing building lobby, bar and smaller function rooms. Mr. Vincent confirmed the smaller function rooms will remain. Decisions have not been made about how best to utilize the lobby space and existing bar. • Mr. Anderson for the routing of hotel deliveries to the east end of the building—will they be routed from Congress Street or Derby Street? He pointed out the 12-ft bridge clearance may not be adequate for box trucks. Mr. Vincent agreed this issue should be explored. City of Saiern--Planning Board Meeting Minutes–April J.7, 2014 Page 8 of 19 • Mr. Anderson asked if the satellite parking lots are within 400-ft of the existing facility? Mr. Vincent advised they will check. Atty Correnti recapped the presentation by summarizing the program for the new building comprised of 6 floors: floors 5-6 residential (14 units), hotels rooms on floors 3-4 (32 units), and public space on floors 1-2. Ms. Menon provided a brief summary of the comments to date received from various City of Salem departments: • Police and Building Departments both identified hours of construction operations are in conflict with ordinance. • Conservation agent advised a letter of conditions is required from the Conservation Commission. • Engineering Department has requested: a traffic study, peer reviewed civil engineering plan and a storm water management plan. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment. Barbara Warren, 5 Hardy Street, Salem—agrees a traffic study needs to be done.The regular deadlock that occurs in the Wharf loop is already a problem. Old marina building is currently used for storage— what provision has been made for these items?Will there be a loading place on Congress Street for residents of the building?Would like to see more clearly how the dining terrace interacts with the • Harborwalk.The City should ask the developer to improve the Harborwalk around the entire Pickering Wharf site as the lighting is very poor and it has not been maintined.The Harbowalk must be maintained and clearly available to people.This new building really shuts off views of the water for everyone except those in the hotel or on the water. Expressed concern that service trucks using the east side adjacent to existing condo owners will create noise problems. Jim Treadwell 36 Felt St, Salem—attended MEPA meeting last winter(late'13). Does this project take into account the consequences of decisions taken by this entity? He advised the dead parking spaces in the Congress Street parking lot were mentioned. The rest facilities available to the public in the existing hotel lobby satisfy a Chapter 91 requirement. Presumably this requirement will continue to apply when the lobby is relocated to the new building.Asked that Atty Correnti please bring us current on MEPA permitting as it applies to this project. • Susan St Pierre advised this project has been through the MEPA process and received a certificate with no conditions. Mr.Treadwell also observed the Herbert Street lot is in a residential area and must meet requirements. Atty Correnti advised they will check the zone for this lot. Teasie Reily Goggin, 9 Wisteria Street, Salem—noted the bridge tender shack on the south side of the Congress Street Bridge is historic, are there plans to leave it? Atty Correnti advised the tender shack site is not part of Pickering Wharf so it is not affected by this project. Mr. Puleo agreed the public question about loading for residence owners is a point that should be addressed. Atty Correnti agreed it would be covered in the next appearance before the Planning Board. City of Salem—Planning Bcard Meeting Minutes--April 37, 2014 Page 9 of _19 • Mr. Puleo summarized that addition city department views are still pending: Fire Department, engineering is waiting for a peer review and a formal traffic analysis. Mr. Clarke pointed out that the traffic analysis needs to be detailed including counts, date/time data collected, etc. Motion and Vote: Tim Ready made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 1, 2014,seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson Mr. Clarke, Ms.Yale, Mr. Griset, Ms. Sides and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. s� d6," F.:: ux�a huh civ rm'rgrda i ✓snq¢ d 'tITtm' a .�,,.?IjWt iw�.,. U. -.i..- s4snu�,,»,,,xm �_,.i ,.,.t.» rwmi.uiu+Y a+ --' u:aiu.�..,,_.NaB AiaM, .. i.,Ja.la a.v Project: A public hearing for Site Plan Review of the proposed redevelopment of the existing building,formerly used as a medical office,into 8 residential units,with associated parking and landscaping. Applicant: ROBERT WILLWERTH Location: 107 HIGHLAND AVENUE(Map 14, Lot 198) Documents and Exhibitions: Photographs of existing site and abutters Attorney Scott Grover, 27 Congress Street, presented for applicant Mr.Willwerth who has an agreement to purchase the property.Atty Grover referenced a photo display to show location of the site near Salem hospital and provide an overview for the Board. Previously a very busy medical practice, there is no active practice now and photos illustrate the neglect.The property is on its way to becoming an • eyesore on a prominent road. The property is approximately 17,000-sf with an estimated 15,000-sf of impervious surface (parking/building). The applicant wants to convert the site back to residential use (111 zoning) and construct eight (8)one-bedroom condominium units(including walkout basement). Building exterior will remain much the same as it appears with upgraded windows and doors to provide a more residential appearance. Two exterior changes are planned; add dormers on backside of the building and add decks to utilize the upper floors of building.The most dramatic proposed change to the site is to eliminate paving around the perimeter of the site and create a vegetative perimeter.The plan proposes 16 parking spaces, 2 per unit. Atty Grover also noted the applicants has held several meetings with neighbors/abutters to present proposed changes, and taken their input into account. Mr. Puleo asked Atty Grover to review for the Board the applicant's appearance before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Atty Grover explained the applicant needed a special permit to change use from commercial non-conforming use to residential non-conforming use.The Zoning Board decided in favor of this change. A second area of relief was needed for the dormer; because zoning ordinance measures height by both feet and number of stories with a 35-ft maximum in this zone.The building height is within requirements, but the addition of the dormer is considered a change to the number of stories. The Zoning Board of Appeals issued one decision in favor on both requests. No appeals have been filed, although the vote is still within the appeals period. A favorable decision from the Planning Board must make any approval conditional upon no appeals. Mr. Puleo confirmed the project provides more parking than required 16 vs 12 spaces. Atty Grover affirmed. Mr. Puleo asked for a description of the proposed traffic flow.Atty Grover responded the applicant is very open to Board suggestions;the existing two curb cuts are quite wide. Mr. Puleo observed the northerly curb cut is on a steep grade; visibility to exit crossing traffic could be challenging. City of Salem--Planning Board Meeting M€nutes—April 17, 2014 Page 10 of 19 Mr. Puleo asked if there is proposed parking lot lighting. Mr. Willwerth responded the current plan is to light from the building. Mr. Puleo asked if they would be able to light the corners of the lot for safety reasons. Mr.Willwerth affirmed yes. Mr. Rieder observed it is challenging to minimize impact on neighbors with building-mounted lighting. Recommended they supplement with pole-mounted lighting. Atty Grover indicated where trash disposal would be located and trash will utilize barrels rather than the existing dumpster.This decision made based on input from the neighbors who objected to the dumpster.The location of the site on an entrance corridor requires this area be enclosed. Ms. Sides recommended the applicant review the converted Bowditch School building on Flint Street as an excellent example of how to treat enclosed trash space. Whatever program is decided will be enforceable as the ownership will be a condominium (vs. apartments). Ms. Sides and Mr. Rieder asked the applicant to describe the new dimensions of the parking and travel area. Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey(project consultant) replied the plan is for 22-ft wide travel lane which allows 2-way traffic circulation. Spaces are 19-ft. Mr. Rieder asked if the Fire Department made any comments regarding these dimensions. Ms. Menon reported the Fire Department is concerned the plan does not address snow removal/storage, but made no comment on maneuvering through the site. Mr. McDowell addressed several concerns raised so far, and provided more details regarding the site . plan: • The landscape plan provides for low-spreading juniper which can take a snow load on the vegetative perimeter. • The developer has agreed to add light bollards in parking lot corners. • Utilities provided via existing water service off Highland Ave.The project will add a separate line for sprinkler system; 2-inch is all that is required. • Interior plumbing will be adjusted to accommodate domestic service. • Easement is on record for access to existing sewer line, which will be inspected. It is large enough to handle 8 units. • Two catch basins for parking lot drainage need attention due to lack of maintenance. Will clean/repair as needed. Mr. Puleo asked if there is a drainage problem in the area after the drainage line/culvert work near Salem Hospital was done. City Engineering Department has issued a letter with several requirements which was read into the record by Ms. Menon. Mr. Puleo advised Engineering Department requirements are conditions for any favorable decision, plus repairs as needed to the sewer lines and catch basins. Ms. Sides asked the applicant to confirm no exterior stairs are planned for the building. Mr. Grover affirmed that is correct, no exterior stairs. Ms. Sides and Mr. Anderson both asked to know the proposed exterior materials. Mr.Willwerth advised the property is currently clad in vinyl siding which will be removed.The hope is to find clapboard siding underneath, then scrape/paint.The Board explored several more details with Mr. Willwerth who affirmed: • Mr. Willwerth's intention is to end up with a painted clapboard building. 0 The plan includes clean-up of sofits/eaves; they hope to restore much of the period trim detail. C€tp of Salem — Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 17, 2,01..E Pa)' 11 of 19 • • The only windows scheduled for replacement are the big picture windows on the front side, first floor. Other windows are replacement vinyl windows which will remain. Until they remove the vinyl siding and aluminum trim they do not know how much replacement work will be needed. • Entry way will be reconstructed and spruced up to provide a more residential feel. • Mr. Anderson expressed a concern that some of the architectural detail will be lost if substantial replacement is needed. This site is on an entrance corridor which has a set of specific requirements whose spirit is intended to preserve our architectural heritage. • Mr. Ready asked to know the year of original construction; Mr. Willwerth believes it to be the 1900-1910 period. • Mr. Anderson asked when floorplans(simple) will be available; Mr. Willwerth advised about 2.5 weeks from now. Mr. Rieder explored details of the landscape plan, with a favorable comment for the reduction of impervious surface. He noted the planned landscaping is too sparse for the size of the space; and the drawing is overly optimistic of growth. He recommended the developer swap out dogwoods and add shade trees in front of building which will provide cooling to the building and a better sound buffer.Atty Grover replied the developer is very appreciative of and open to board suggestions as the scale of project is not large enough for major landscaping design work.They have recently modified the plan to add shade trees to east property line to provide meaningful screening for neighbors. Mr. Rieder recommended more small trees that will grow rather than just a couple of bigger trees. . Mr. Puleo asked to know the materials of the existing fence and proposed changes. Mr.Willwerth replied the existing fence will be replaced and extended (based on discussions to date with neighbors); the applicant is working with the neighbors to determine a joint solution. Mr. Puleo asked to know the location of outside condensers/mechanical; Mr. Willwerth confirmed yes, there will be 8 HVAC units placement is still to be determined. Mr.Anderson requested the applicant return with more details as the current plan not specific enough for The Planning Board to make a decision. Please check overlay district requirements and address in your submission. The Board generally agreed the site plan needs to be updated to include: • site elevations that note the materials • parking/circulation plan with entries/exits explained • basic floorplan that enables the Board to evaluate the resident spaces o Atty Grover noted that site plan review does not typically include floorplan approval. The Board clarified construction drawings are not required,just a rough layout. • light fixture cuts • landscape plan that specifies type of fencing and plant materials • HVAC placement • Overlay district requirements The Board appreciates the timing but cannot issue a decision without more detail. t, Ms. Menon read into the record a letter from George Milowe, MD, officed at 90 Highland Avenue, against any conversion to residential use. City of Sz;lern—Planning Board, Meeting Minutes --April 17, 2014 Pagc 12 of 19 Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment. John Lunt, 6 Greenway Road, Salem—abutter, spoke in favor of the project and made the following observations: traffic volume may actually decrease from levels when a busy medical practice was located in the building, current lighting from the building is adequate and not overly disruptive for neighbors. This project is a good fit for the neighborhood. Stan Porrier, 8 Cottage Street, Salem—abutter, spoke in favor in the project and made the following observations: emphasized the R1 zoning should remain in place for this neighborhood, he supports the proposed improvements to the existing fence across his property line. Jim Treadwell, 36 Felts, Salem—requested the developer check entrance corridor requirements regarding landscaping. Teasie Riley Goggin, 9 Wisteria Street,Salem—spoke in favor of the project and inquired if there is a time limit for applicant to receive permit based on financing requirements.Atty Grover advised the purchase/sale agreement has already been extended due to Zoning Board of Appeals process; doesn't know if further extension will be possible. The Chair advised the applicant the planning staff will provide a list of what is needed to provide a fuller presentation and potentially get a decision at the May 1, 2014, Planning Board meeting. • Motion and Vote: Mr. Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 1, 2014,seconded by Mr. Griset. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. � � �� .y. v �a"7w'i 16i .x1� YFMXW«uwau rcs=r & t aislL,ncc..,i„8 �.a.1 Chairman Chuck Puleo directed the Planning Board to take up the issue of a recommendation to the City Council regarding the pending ordinance change based on the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels to be updated on July 16,2014; previously introduced as the first agenda item and moved to New Business. Mr. Clarke asked if the issue for the Planning Board is to provide a recommendation to the City Council to accept(or not)the language as stated in the proposed ordinance. Chairman Puleo affirmed. Mr. Puleo called attention to a recommendation from staff that the proposed Ordinance be supported because a failure to adopt the new flood plain management regulations recommendation, would result in the city of Salem being suspended from the National Flood Insurance Program, with the result that owners would not be able to purchase NFIP insurance policies and existing policies would not be renewed. The end result would be a lack of protection for Salem property owners. Ms. Yale shared with the Planning Board members a key concern that has been discussed at various meetings on this issue—how will property owners learn they are now in the flood plain?She encouraged the Planning Board recommend to the City Council newspaper notices be published to alert the public as a result of any action they take to amend the local zoning ordinance to incorporate the new maps. City of Salem—Planning Board ivlee,ing Minutes--Aprii 1.7, 2014 Page13of19 • Mr. Griset voiced a common concern that the City is being asked to approve the adoption of a map that has not been finalized.What if FEMA makes changes after Salem has modified its ordinance and by perforce the City adopts whatever map is ultimately issued on July 16, 2014. Is the City being asked to essentially sign a blank check? After group discussion,the Board concluded this is an awkward timing issue in coordinating federal/state/local government, but that a failure to act is the real risk. Mr. Anderson indicated letter from Mayor Driscoll's office advised no changes have been made to the proposed maps so far and none expected. Mr. Ready suggested the Planning Board recommendation letter to City Council include the request that Council ensure maximum distribution of the information to Salem residents regarding the newly issued maps. Motion and Vote:Mr. Clarke made a motion that the Planning Board issue a recommendation to the Salem City Council to support the language in the amendment to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 8.1.2.2 (a), to update Flood Hazard District Boundaries, and Base Flood Elevation and Floodwav Data to incorporate the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels updated on July 16, 2014, and that said letter include a request that Council ensure maximum distribution of the information to Salem residents regarding the newly issued maps, seconded by Ms. Yale. The vote was unanimous with eight(8) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder) and none (0)opposed y 7a i PuvS `i�� r_gyp e�.e k �a s `;`'' e mu i " aq "u>"xis �6��i i33p "' a, ,t u "W.u n � eaw,odkv;—. �4ufi a..:�*v;!�e�:�.}.t�;._'.. "` �iFa+"R-.i..ftww'M xu � .Intlt ....`d� f un '= �6t' a,. �.�.us Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit,for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92'/: Boston St(Map 15, Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) Documents and Exhibitions:Additional renderings on slide show. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, presented on behalf of the applicant, introduced and provided an overview of what will be covered at this meeting. Peer review is ongoing (civil engineering and traffic peer reviews in progress simultaneously). The project has been to DRB (Design Review Board) Romeo Moreira of Perkins+Will Architects will provide the update assisted by Alan Buie.They have incorporated Planning Board comments from past meetings including public comments.This presentation addresses some of the Board's questions. Allen Buie reviewed revised site layout and recapped the layout of site: public/visitor parking surface lot and the main entrance is still accessed from Boston Street, staff parking and entrance accessed from Goodhue Street, garden walls organize the landscaping and respite garden. He acknowledged previous • comments on tree locations which are now situated at the street edge along the Boston Street sidewalk. Mr. Moreira advised the transformer, condenser and emergency generator are now located on the City of Salem—PlanninU Board Meeting Mie ulps--April :17, 2014 Page 14 of 19 • Goodhue Street level near the stair(egress only) along east side of building.These are the only mechanicals located outside the building. Board follow-up questions and discussions: • Mr. Rieder clarified there is no foot traffic from Goodhue to Boston Street along east side of the property line. Mr. Moreira affirmed and indicated any pedestrians that might be in the immediate area would be staff or others in an emergency situation. • Mr. Puleo asked if all HVAC/mechanical are in the building. Mr. Moreira affirmed yes, and added the transformer and emergency generator must be placed outside per code requirements. There will be fencing to enclose these.There are currently no 3-dimensional renderings of this detail as of now. • Mr. Rieder reminded the applicant team there had been a question about dimensions of the Boston Street sidewalk. Mr. Buie advised it is 6-ft from the property line to the edge of the curb, and that the sidewalk and curb is being extended to the Dunkin Donuts.The sidewalk is 5.5-ft with a 6-inch curbstone. • Mr. Rieder asked for details regarding where trees will be located,in sidewalk tree pits? He explained that due to the dimensions of the sidewalk,tree pits will be limited to 2-ft to allow wheelchairs to pass, 2-ft tree pits are inadequate for street trees because of the size of the rootball. While trees at curbside are generally positive as they provide another layer vehicle protection, in this case he recommended the trees be located on the backside of the sidewalk in the lawn about 24-30 inches from the sidewalk edge. • o Atty Correnti advised there is a proposed Boston Street Improvement Program not designed yet—they want to coordinate with the City and complement this program. • Mr. Anderson advised there is an also an improvement plan for Goodhue Street and the project should coordinate with this as well. o Atty Correnti advised they have seen proposed versions of the traffic improvement plan and are waiting to see the final. o Mr. Moreira added the group working on the Goodhue Street area traffic improvement plan had not seen this site plan and proposed building.They are reviewing it now before they finalize the traffic improvement plan. • Mr. Rieder recommended the trees proposed along Goodhue Street side be located streetside (vs. Boston St where they should be away from street due to space limitations for the root systems). o Atty Correnti advised they will present revised details on street trees along Boston and Goodhue at the next appearance before the Planning Board. Mr. Moreira continued the presentation and pointed out there is now a public entrance to the building from the Goodhue Street side with access to the elevator. He also described the mechanical equipment exhaust for the building will be built into the foundation wall supporting the metal screen on the Goodhue Street side.This was,presented to the DRB who has requested additional details of the wall sections. An additional rendering presented the view across Boston Street looking at entrance to the site and demonstrating that the roof line is not visible. Another rendering was presented to show the view from Walgreens looking up Boston Street toward the site. • Mr. Moriera presented an update on the lighting plan and re-stated the lighting objectives: create safe environment, be respectful of neighbors and eliminate trespass. Highlights include: City of Salern – Manning Board neling Minutes–April 17, 2)J.4 Pag;� 7.5 of 19 • • Main parking area bollards at each end of the lot and pole-mounted fixtures located between trees. • Main entrance dropoff area to feature a bench and lighting g g • Retaining wall sconces • Loading dock lighting. Board follow-up questions and discussions: • Mr. Anderson asked for details on the lower lot lighting and was advised they will be presented shortly. • Mr. Clarke observed the City doesn't have a transportation department to consolidate transportation comments. He suggested traffic cameras at major intersections are a feature that needs to be added as new projects come online. He suggested developers might be asked to add a camera(s)to provide video feed to the City, and asked Ms. Menon to investigate if the City could make this a requirement. He offered this is not the correct forum for this suggestion, but this project is good illustration of the need. • Mr. Anderson asked for color on metal panel and a sample was shown; described color as champagne, warmer neutral. He appreciates the revised color selection, but expressed he still has concerns with using metal on the exterior of the building in this neighborhood. He asked if the corner details are cut or folded. Mr. Buie advised it is a preformed piece.The goal is to be very fine with the detailing where the panel meeting the sofit, sills, corners, etc.The intention is to cleanly cap the parapet. • Mr. Moreira continued the update and reported the project had success with at their recent appearance before the DRB, granted approval with a few conditions including the exterior lighting plan. Ms. Sides advised it was a very throrough presentation to the DRB who is very pleased with the progress. Chairman Puleo opened the hearing to the public for comment • The Chair read into the record two letters from James Treadwell of 36 Felt Street, Salem. His letters were addressed to the City Planner expressing his key concerns: o Brick is not being used on the new building planned for this site despite the explicit preference for brick written into the NRCC plan. o Asked if there was any effort to incorporate the existing FlynnTan sign into the new development. • James Treadwell, 36 Felt Street,Salem—expressed several concerns and his dismay that the DRB is not holding new projects to the recommended standards as put forth in the NRCC and Mack Park Neighborhood Plan; particularly with their failure to insist on the use of brick on new building exteriors. o The City's traffic improvement plan for the Goodhue Street neighborhood has not been consolidated with the landscaping plan for this development. It is urgent these two projects are coordinated and that plan be presented in detail to the Planning Board including traffic study metrics. o Zoning and entrance corridor requirements have not been fully addressed by the developer on this site. o Asked whether the Conservation Commission be involved or not in the approval of this • plan. Will they waive jurisdiction or present a review? City of Salem —Plnnning Board N'leeting Minutes—April '17, 2014 Page :1.6 of 19 • Bob Griffin,civil engineer for the developer responded and indicated the current flood maps do not touch the site, but they expect the future map will touch a small portion of the site, and therefore Conservation Commission approval will likely be required; perhaps a limited scope such as an RDA. o Asked who will analyze the sophisticated storm water management plan that is part of this project. • Ms. Menon advised a civil peer review consultant has been engaged to review this aspect of the plan and is in process. o Asked who will review the lighting plan. • Mr. Puleo advised lighting will be reviewed by the Planning Board. o Mr.Treadwell observed the design features of this project are not pedestrian friendly particularly on the Goodhue Street side of the site. He singled out: • Transformer and generator sited alongside a sidewalk • Goodhue Street entrance if planned to be a public entrance should not be treated as a service entrance. Goodhue Street retaining wall alongside the sidewalk is enormous. • Metal screen along garage and adjacent the sidewalk is not pedestrian friendly. o Asked if the planned parking meets zoning requirements. o Asked how they plan to verify the site is meeting requirement. Chairman Puleo asked if there are further comments from the public or Board. • • Mr.Anderson asked if updated drawings will be available in advance of the next appearance before the Planning Board to enable members to study them in advance.Atty Correnti affirmed, yes. Ms. Menon advised it is helpful to receive an electronic copy in advance, and then several sets of hard copies available at the meeting. • Mr. Clarke asked how many parking spaces planned for the garage.Atty Correnti clarified garage parking is for staff/tenants only. o Mr. Clarke suggested audible/visual warning notice when vehicles exiting the garage to safeguard pedestrians. Civil engineer for the project Bob Griffin advised a warning system will likely be needed based on the proximity to the sidewalk and street. Mr. Griffin quoted the zoning ordinance requirement of 3 spaces per professional person, and one space for every two employees; a total of 83 spaces are required for Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem (PAGS) and a tenant based on the staffing profile (45 spaces for PAGS and 38 projected for tenant). Mr. Clarke observed that the location of this site does not lend itself to public transit for staff and that the calculation formula may not fit actual need. Mr. Griffin identified the locations of 89 regular spaces and 6 compact space reserved for staff, a total of 95 spaces which exceeds the zoning requirement of 83 spaces. Chairman Puleo summarized the outstanding issues this project needs to present to the Planning Board: FST report, relocation of street trees. Mr. Puleo expressed a concern about noise generated by the exterior units on Goodhue Street (transformer, condenser and emergency generator). Mr. Griffin advised Witch City Cycle and other • buildings will push noise upward and away from pedestrians. Mr. Puleo indicated there are decibel City of Salem —Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3.7, 2011 Pago '17 of 19 • requirements. Timing of weekly generator cycling should be sensitive to the neighborhood; suggested daytime hours such as 3:OOpm during rush hour. Mr. Griffin offered some additional details that had been requested or mentioned at their previous appearance before the Board: curbstones are all granite building height is 30-ft Motion and Vote: Ms. Sides made a motion to continue the public hearing to May 1, 2014, seconded by Ms. Yale. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Yale, Ms. Side, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. P.. r +f'f'P - a n r., r i- y 4_9 �;. 'E e E�i �3f �. i H aim SISV Id..E�•b�44mn.r<<.aii.UE. n.a,.�9�Cdr[ io t _dSM .udi�.4�4�xu e!i � ;,.r.,aSu4 u116e�,�.ikd,uk 4��viLn�[�6�i.FP�hw.v�rafF.{.rbvadt�hur..9 � Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change, minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration, modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements, and enlargement of courtyard area. Applicant: OLD SALEM JAIL VENTURES, LLC Location: 50 St. Peter St(Map 35, Lot 179) • Documents and Exhibitions: Handout of renderings and drawings. Dan Riccardelli, Seger Architects Inc., 10 Derby Square, presented on behalf of the applicant. He reviewed site plan including the original configuration and the requested change.The US Park Service asked the new building be moved back from the McIntyre building, which narrows footprint and widens the courtyard. The plan still calls for 13 units just in a different configuration than originally proposed. Original 36 parking spaces onsite remain; the developer is negotiating for an additional 7 offsite parking spaces. Chairman Puleo stated the Planning Board had requested written confirmation from the Fire Department that the plan changes provide access to all buildings on the site.A letter from Fire Chief David Cody was read into record. Mr. Riccardelli confirmed the applicant will meet all requirements itemized by the letter from the Fire Chief. Mr. Rieder asked Mr. Ricciarelli to trace the ADA route and confirmed it will be maintained.There is a large tree that will be removed. Motion and Vote: Ms. Sides made a motion to approve the request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint chanae, minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration, modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements, and enlargement of courtyard area as shown on the Plan dated March 20, 2014 seconded by Mr. Rieder. The vote was . unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. City of Salem --Planning hoard Mewing Minutes--Apri1 .17, 201,4 Page„ 1.8 of 19 • m s vM d` f d do .� t uap"'Fk cy + p ,+ v +r 1 u r i w.um t o 'e Gw, °�1.F �,a4G,.aSaW.RCuvaua�$..._:„n =vsxtMl: C ^VGamui��"Nii +:a;;,..H„u+.ui.. `.r .N ,:n°��"�..+.'.3+ a a++o�dxFwia"si�:nGsk.3a,CikUsu„�'1„d;e �'}C 5:n ' Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approve Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit,to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL, LLC Location: 28 Goodhue ST(Map 16, Lot 372) Documents and Exhibitions: • Guardrail detail drawing for the proposed vehicular barrier system. • April 16 letter from Architect Thomas Galvin specifying new proposed materials. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, available to answer any residual questions. Ms. Menon recapped the letter, the proposed treatment is now a wooden guardrail to be situated along the parking lot.This meets the needs of the Conservation Commission and was previously approved by the DRB.The placement has been moved away from the pedestrian fence, to the grassy strip between the pedestrian walkway and the parking lot. • Mr. Rider asked if the post is a flanged beam or tube stock. It is steel pipe per the letter/drawing. Mr. Puleo checked the drawing to confirm there is pedestrian access from parking lot to walkway. Mr. Rieder asked for the distance from the edge of paving to guardrail. While not provided on the drawing, the plan illustrates the guardrail will follow the curb so that distance will vary. Atty Correnti suggested the motion reference Mr. Galvin's letter which will enable these details to be recorded at the Registry as part of the decision. Motion and Vote: Mr. Clarke made a motion to approve the request for on insignificant change to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway using materials specified in Mr. Tom Galvin's letter dated April 16,2014,seconded by Mr.Anderson. The vote was unanimous with five(5) eligible members in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none(0) opposed. anaa �mN%N" .nwa5 i°+5? CCN` �yv + sss+�C EgFy ncpr Gam" W "s«'S' %+�L', Old/New Business g: N br�: ++tP,n r 3 i i a su P ...uK gay OMA � 3 {.n.i0:5a. No old business was raised for further discussion. 1 a3§ rFUTasfs+5� e e aMEN r u t e + X31+i o-5 R'+ wR, +,,;�iti+u„v.a �: t;zPr„a i ,+a5�"..»1+r 4 F'p�a�w .�.."::� + r- +N r"'r36"t#+et xH Adjournment ,rw , ,.v,v„ r _.,�_m„ . • City&Salern—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—Apd; 1.7,2013 Page 19 of :19 • Motion and Vote: Mr. Clarke made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Yale. The vote was unanimous with eight(8)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke, Ms. Yale, Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 1055 pm. For actions where the decisions are incorporated by reference into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.solem.comlPaQesISatemMA PlanMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 5/1/2014 • • City of Salem Joint City Council and Planning Board Public Hearing Meeting Minutes April 16, 2014 A Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board and the City Council was held in the Council Chamber on Wednesday, April 16, 2014 at 7:00 P.M., for the purpose of discussing an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance relative to Section 8.1.2.2(a) to update Flood Hazard District Boundaries, and Base Flood Elevation and Floodway Data to incorporate the Essex County Flood Insurance Rate Map panels updated on July 16, 2014. Planning Board members present were Ben Anderson, Randy Clarke, William J. Griset, Jr., Timothy Ready, Kirt Rieder and Dale Yale. Also present was City Planner Lynn Duncan. Councilors absent were Todd Siegel, Josh Turiel, Joseph O'Keefe and Thomas Furey. President Robert McCarthy presided. President Robert McCarthy introduced the members of the Planning Board. Councillor McCarthy turned the floor over to City Planner Lynn Duncan. • Ms. Duncan stated that this is a housekeeping issue for the flood hazard zoning ordinance provisions as FEMA requires communities to update their zoning. The City has updated its flood hazard provisions previously, as we are being required to do so now. The action is to update current wording in the ordinance to reflect the new FEMA maps and panels. This has to be done and sent in by July 16, 2014. Staying in compliance allows Salem property owners to be able to obtain flood insurance. The process is to hold this public hearing then to refer the matter to the Planning Board for their recommendation. After the recommendation is sent to the City Council, it needs to be adopted for first and second passage. John Carr, 7 River Street, Salem questioned would this insurance affect new construction and whether the city wanted to encourage construction in floodplains. Lynn Duncan, City Planner, stated there is no difference for flood insurance on existing properties or new properties. Judy White 3 Cheval Avenue, Salem stated she is in a flood area at the Willows and has had flood insurance since 1978. She stated she came to see if there were any questions by the Council or Planning Board and wanted to make sure they would approve this ordinance because if it were not passed, she would not be eligible for flood insurance. Tim Ready, Planning Board member, stated that they were here to accomplish this. • William Griset, Planning Board member, asked if we are participating in NFIP/CRS 1 of 3 d Lynn Duncan, City Planner, stated that they were currently looking at this to see if the • City is eligible. Councillor McCarthy stated that he represents a ward that is surrounded by water and also represents Bakers Island. He stated that costs are astronomical for flood insurance, and asked how many new parcels are now in the flood plain. Lynn Duncan stated that FEMA does not provide that information. There is an increase in area, but the maps are not on a parcel basis. The cost has increased, but the Federal Government limited the premium increase to 15%. Councillor Legault stated he looked at the maps. There there are 13 — 15 maps which you are unable to get much detail from. Lynn Duncan offered that the Councillor could come to the Planning Department to look at large maps. Mr. Griset asked if you can scan the maps to a pdf and then zoom in with Adobe. Councillor Legault said he is concerned about notification to residents. Lynn Duncan stated that the Planning Department does not have information on a parcel by parcel basis. Councillor Legault said that the city should make an effort to get information out to the public and asked if GIS could do this. Lynn Duncan stated she will look into it tomorrow and noted that the city could put the information out on City News. Kirt Rieder Planning Board Member stated his frustration with the lack of information from FEMA. Jane Arlander resident stated she called FEMA and asked why it is so difficult to bring up maps that are online. FEMA stated they were making changes, but she said she got a copy of a map from Tom Devine in the Planning Department. • Councillor McCarthy asked if there is a report on file with the Planning Department from FEMA as referenced on the maps and what it includes. Lynn Duncan stated that she will get the information about what is included in the report, but does not believe that it includes parcel information. Councillor McCarthy stated that he knows it is housekeeping, but if there's a report on what area is most affected this would be helpful. He stated that he understood that Council needs to adopt the new plans, but he is concerned about the cost, and noted that these are hard questions. Lynn Duncan stated she wished we had a way to notify residents, but the maps are hard to discern if someone is in the area. She will look into the report and get the most usable maps. FEMA said these are the final maps. Councillor Eppley - Ward Four Councillor is concerned about flooding and the city needs to have smart building with the water table rising. Randy Clarke, Planning Board Member, asked if FEMA sends a letter to residents in the floodplain. Lynn Duncan stated that smart planning is a valid point. She stated that FEMA does not contact residents. • 2of3 • There was no one appearing in opposition. Councillor Legault moved that the hearing be closed. It was so voted. Councillor Legault moved that the matter be referred to the Planning Board for their recommendation. It was so voted. On the motion of Councillor Legault the hearing was closed at 7:40 P.M. Approved by the Planning Board on 8/7/2014 • 3of3 0 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 MAA 28 A 11: 13 rI CITY CLEI;p;�SglE �i, NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,April 3, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • March 20,2014 Meeting Minutes • III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 'h BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST(Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST(Map 34,Lot 408) • Project: A public hearing for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots, each with less than the required This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on j&I( (( Zf; ZZ14- at Il,'l3% in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. i City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for April 3, 2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • minimum frontage. Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR) Applicant: PETER K. HANI'ZOPOULOS Location: 13 CHERRY HILL AVENUE (Map 14,Lot 225) Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change,minimal panting lot and drive reconfiguration,modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements, and enlargement of courtyard area. Applicant: OLD SALEM JAIL VENTURES,LLC Location: 50 ST. PETER STREET (Map 35,Lot 179) Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit, to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL,LLC Location: 28 GOODHUE STREET (Map 16,Lot 372) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS • V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour rigbts under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 5 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through S 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 WW W.SALENI.CON1 • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND mina.. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GoONIN DUNCAN,AICD DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Dana Menon,Staff Planner DATE: April 1, 2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting—April 3,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Planner's Memo • ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes - March 20,2014 Materials for the agenda items are included in the packet for the 4/03/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 1. Discussion and Vote—Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediattic Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 /2 BOSTON STREET (NRCC). Specifically,the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking,landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. This will be a continuation of the hearing on this application. The hearing was opened at the February 20, 2014 meeting. The Board voted to refer the applicant to the DRB for review. At their March 26d`meeting, the DRB recommended the project for approval,with conditions. The staff planner for the DRB is currently drafting the recommendation document, and it will be available to you at the meeting on the 3rd. 2. Discussion and Vote—Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites,LLC for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. This project was submitted at the end of January,and at the February 20th meeting the petitioner requested to open the hearing,but not to present any evidence,and to continue the hearing to the April 3,2014 Planning • Board meeting. City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—April 1,2014 • Page 2 of 3 The petitioner proposes to demolish the existing Marina building and construct a second building to be part of the Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites. They propose to augment on-site parking with satellite parking in two off-site lots: 25 Peabody Street and 13-15 Herbert Street. The submitted plan and detail sheets do not show the required upgrades to the existing Harborwalk in Pickering Wharf, specifically the sections along the hotel expansion site and from Finz to Victoria Station. These improvements are described in the Environmental Impact Statement submitted to the Board,pages 11-15. These upgrades are required by DEP under the Chapter 91 Waterways licensing for the project, because of the substitutions and allowances that were afforded to the Waterfront Hotel through the Salem Harbor Plan Update process. The upgrades must comply with the City's specific Harborwalk standards (as executed in the recently completed section of the Harborwalk). Attachment A is an excerpt from the Salem Harbor Plan Update,which discusses these requirements. It is important to note that the walkway is required to be a"full, clear ten feet"in width. It appears that the Harborwalk at Congress Street is less than 10'wide, as the rad on the Congress St Bridge and the proposed hotel turret create a pinch-point in the walkway. 3. Discussion and Vote—Request of Peter K Hantzopoulos for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots,each with less than the required minimum frontage. Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control(ANR), for the property located at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue (Map 14,Lot 225). The applicant submitted an application for an ANR plan and an application for a Waiver from Frontage. The ANR cannot be approved without approval of the Waiver from Frontage. Six votes are required to approve a . Waiver from Frontage,and there will only be five board members in attendance at the meeting, so this proposal cannot be heard. The Board will have to vote to: 1) approve an additional Request for Extension of Deadline for Planning Board Final Action on the ANR plan and 2) continue the hearing on the Waiver from Frontage. At the last meeting, the Board also had to vote to approve an extension of deadline on final action for the ANR, as the ANR was submitted with insufficient time to advertise the accompanying Waiver from Frontage request for the March 6th meeting. On January 29, 2014 The Zoning Board of Appeals issued a Decision granting Variances from the mitritnum required lot area, the minimum required lot frontage, and the minimum required lot width for the creation of two lots out of the existing lot at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue. A copy of that Decision will be enclosed in your packets for the April 17,h meeting. 4. Discussion and Vote—Request of Old Salem Jail Ventures,LLC for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change,minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration, modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements,and enlargement of courtyard area, for the property located at 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179). The applicant has submitted a copy of the previously approved plan and a copy of the proposed plan for your review,as well as a brief description of the changes to the previously approved plan. These documents are included under Attachment A. This proposal has already gone before the DRB and the SRA. The SRA decision is included under Attachment A. • City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—April 1, 2014 • Page 3 of 3 5. Discussion and Vote—Request of North River Canal,LLC for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit,North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit,to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway,for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street(Map 16,Lot 372). The Planning Board approved the 28 Goodhue project in 2007. The Planning Board decision dated February 20,2007 required the installation of a four-foot high pedestrian fence between the pedestrian way and the North River Canal. The Conservation Commission then required a vehicular guardrail in the same location, to prevent an errant passenger vehicle from the nearby parking lot,or a snow-clearing vehicle on the pedestrian way, from inadvertently entering the canal. These two requirements are in conflict,and the applicant is attempting to satisfy the concerns of both boards. The planning department expressed their preference for use of the pedestrian fence installed along the harborwalk, as the new city standard. This fence is Avcon's "Malibu" fence (details attached under Attachment B). The applicant believes that the Avcon fence will be adequate to prevent their snow-removal equipment from entering the canal (they intend to use a snow blower),and they have proposed using concrete blocks between the parking lot and the pedestrian way to stop vehicles from the parking lot. They believe this solution will meet the requirements of both the Planning Board and the Conservation Commission. The plans and details related to this request are included under Attachment B. • II • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board �IG� E)OCA, `, Date I Na a Nlaili g ddress Phone # Email Y • • Page of CITY OF SALEM • ?a PLANNING BOARD City of Salem Planning Board 978-619-5685 Will hold a public hearing for all interested parties on the request of PETER K. HANTZOPOULOS for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots, each with less than the required minimum frontage, from the single lot located at 13 CHERRY HILL AVENUE (Map 14, Lot 225) in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A. Said hearing will be held on Thursday, April 3, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Room 313, Third Floor, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review at the Department of Planning & Community Development, P floor, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. ` Charles Puleo Chair • Salem News: 3/20/2014 & 3/27/2014 ti ro K o C7 a rn p, r M N rn p r� T b W This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem,.Mass. on 171,j`G1i o�divLd/1/ at ,1e:3 y1/h in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. 120 WAS HINUVON Sn*-hF, SALEM, i�iASS.ACHUSE1%S 01970 • PHONL 976.619.5635 • FAX 973.740.0404 \kVVW,SALFM.C:0M City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 1 of 8 • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday,April 3, 2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 3, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:01 pm. lir-1—, P59 y ' "1 P rVit'Wif - ssbsasrvF,n ry i t Call [ £ G ty aE c ��N e �._.,.N ��o-w �nqj iz G c § u:"' i32E.. Sx�gay.. _. 'g ,�. .�..._. xGiliaa,w av:ad�itw�'L'6 Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready, Vice Chair, and Randy Clarke. Absent: Dale Yale, Helen Sides and Bill Griset. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Approvalof�Minutes, ' March 20, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes No comments or corrections were made by the Planning.Board members. • Motion and Vote: Kirt Rieder made a motion to approve the minutes as written, seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with five(5)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0) opposed The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Mr. Puleo recognized City Council members Elaine Milo (Councilor at Large) and David Eppley (Ward 4 Councilor) in the audience and thanked them for their attendance. r S,+` "A' h�Kxi F �'iP' _ , t"' tltl MMdM N44 h Regular Agenda iqK +°�n�� �a�h ,E , . so6°" q fi,p Ii 1, �,E s€;;fl m..� �.Hl1Prt.�li�:� .'twsw,.aK uZH -3ae:a�i ._5� r��ufl"itl2i:fi#!� .•�'�� . . Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92'/:Boston St(Map 15, Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE HEARING TO APRIL 17,2014 Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, on behalf of the applicant, submitted a written request to continue the public hearing tol April 17, 2014. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing to April 17 2014 • seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr. Ready, Mr. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 2 of 8 • Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel &Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERRONT HOTEL&SUITES, LLC Locations: 19 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 489); 23 Congress St(Map 34, Lot 447); 223-231 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 446; 235 Derby St(Map 34, Lot 445); Congress St(Map 34, Lot 408); 13-15 Herbert St(map 35, Lot 321); 25 Peabody St(Map 34, Lot 436);The Remaining land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust(Map 34, Lot 408) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE HEARING TO APRIL 17,2014 Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, on behalf of the applicant, submitted a written request to continue until April 17, 2014. • Motion and Vote: Kirt Rieder made a motion to continue the public hearing to April 17, 2014,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. a Project: A public hearing for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the creation of two lots, each with less than the required minimum frontage.Also an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR). Applicant: PETER K HANTZOPOULOS Location: 13 Cherry Hill Avenue(Map 14, Lot 225) Ms. Menon advised that six(6) members are required to hear and vote on a Special Permit request.The applicant requested: 1) to extend the deadline for planning board final action on the ANR that is associated with the waiver from frontage, and 2)to continue the hearing on the waiver from frontage. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to extend the deadline for planning board action on the ANR, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with five(5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and • made a part of these minutes. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 3 of 8 • Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made o motion to continue the public hearing on the waiver from frontage special permit request until April 17, 2014, seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with five(5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder) and none(0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approved Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit to allow minimal building footprint change, minimal parking lot and drive reconfiguration, modified arch entry to meet fire safety requirements,and enlargement of courtyard area. Applicant: OLD SALEM JAIL VENTURES, LLC Location: 50 St. Peter St(Map 35, Lot 179) John Seger, principal, Seger Architects Inc., 10 Derby Square, on behalf of the applicant, submitted a written request to continue the public hearing to April 17, 2014. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing until April 17 2014 seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo Mr. Ready Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder) and none(0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Project: Request for an insignificant change to the previously approve Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Special Permit,to allow modification to the pedestrian and vehicular barrier systems along the public walkway. Applicant: NORTH RIVER CANAL, LLC Location: 28 Goodhue ST(Map 16, Lot 372) Documents and Exhibitions: • Plan, section, and images of the proposed treatment of the pedestrian walkway, pedestrian barrier system, and vehicular barrier system. Tom Galvin, architect with JD LaGrasse &Associates of Andover, MA, presents the petition on the applicant's behalf. Mr. Galvin provided context and reviewed the original Planning Board approved plan which called for a pedestrian walkway adjacent to the canal with a 4-foot high fence to prevent the pedestrians from entering the water. Following the Planning Board approval,the Conservation Commission issued a Decision requiring a vehicular barrier to prevent vehicles from accidentally entering the waterway. In • light of the Conservation Commission ruling the developers first considered seeking relief from the 4-ft decorative (pedestrian) fence. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 4 of 8 • Mr. Puleo clarified this is the fence along the pedestrian way. Mr. Galvin affirmed, and advised there is a 1 to 2 foot elevation change from the top of the retaining wall to the canal, and with this grade change the decision was made to keep the 4-foot fence to protect pedestrians. Mr. Rieder observed this is a tidal channel and the water level rises and falls during the course of a day. Mr. Galvin stated that after discussions with city planning department(Dana Menon and Tom Devine of the Conservation Commission) the developer's decision was to keep the 4 foot pedestrian fence between the pedestrian path and the canal edge, and find a solution for the vehicle barrier.The applicant's proposal currently before the Planning Board is to erect concrete pre-cast barriers amongst the landscaping buffer between the parking lot and the pedestrian pathway.The proposed barriers would be 2-ft X 2-ft X 6-ft long, placed with 5 to 6 foot gaps to be filled with landscaping (shrubs , evergreen and deciduous trees, and seasonal plantings). Mr. Galvin added that the original Conservation Commission decision required a traditional guard rail 2 feet off the ground with a 12" rail and metal posts every 6 feet, situated between the pedestrian pathway and the water. Ms. Menon clarified that the Conservation Commission proposal was to have the vehicular barrier between the pathway and the water, so starting from the water's edge,the site features would be: • canal retaining wall, pedestrian fence,vehicular barrier, pedestrian pathway, and finally the parking lot. Mr. Galvin explained that the developer was concerned this treatment(the combined 4-foot pedestrian fence and 2-foot vehicular barrier) would create a collection of windblown trash along the pedestrian pathway. Planning board members agreed this was an unattractive solution. Mr. Galvin summarized the Conservation Commission's concerns as: • Provide vehicular barriers to prevent vehicles from using the pedestrian way(bollards proposed to prevent entrance) or accidentally entering the waterway. He noted the current proposal is to keep the 4-foot pedestrian fence between the water and the pedestrian pathway.The current thinking is to utilize fencing similar to what the city has installed along the South River pedestrian pathway between Congress and Lafayette Streets, adding the vehicular barrier [at the parking lot] in the form of concrete blocks interspersed with substantial landscaping. Mr. Ready observed the standard for the 4-foot fence approved by the planning board is upscale, and contributing to the environment we are trying to create in this neighborhood. It seems the combination of fence and cement blocks compromises the aesthetic intent of the approved plan. Mr. Galvin advised the current proposal places the blocks as far from the decorative, pedestrian fence and the pedestrian way as possible.The 2-foot blocks could also act as a bench, supplementing other benches.There would be landscaping placed intermittently to improve the aesthetic and soften the look of the blocks. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 5 of 8 • Mr. Clarke expressed a serious concern that pre-cast concrete blocks were not appropriate as these materials are most commonly used as construction and terrorist barriers.This design does not flow. These blocks are not appropriate as alternative benches. There was general Board discussion about the intent of the Conservation Commission's requirement and their scope of oversight. Dana Menon clarified the Commission is not dictating public safety but concerned with keeping vehicles out of the canal. Mr. Rieder noted that the applicant proposes to use a 4-foot high pedestrian fence, but the applicable code only requires a 42 inch high barrier. He agreed that the solution of siting the vehicular barrier close to pedestrian barrier is poor design as it impedes pedestrians from using the fence as a viewpoint and it becomes a trash collector. He echoed Mr. Clarke's comment that the concrete blocks are a poor choice of material due to their coarse design. He also commented that the proposed layout gives the site a haphazard look. The concrete blocks are incompatible with other design choices made for the site, and detract from the overall positive impact achieved with the project. He indicated he was sensitive to the likelihood the material choice was made for cost efficiency reasons. Mr. Galvin confirmed cost is a serious consideration.The budget for these two barriers as proposed is now estimated to be in excess of$80,000. Mr. Rieder observed the barriers are not adequate for seating, and are not faithfully depicted in the elevation. In reality they have beveled key joints and visible rebar.They are not a positive amenity. Adding these blocks is a step backwards from the success of the project's design and build to date. Mr. Anderson requested clarification on what was originally approved for the walkway. Ms. Menon advised that the Planning Board approved a pedestrian scale fence between the walkway and the water. The Conservation Commission approved a vehicular barrier for the same location. Mr.Anderson also asked to understand why the fence is at the edge of the sidewalk rather than on the top of the canal wall. Ms. Menon answered that the grade of the pedestrian walkway relative to the top of the canal wall is variable, so the pedestrian fence cannot be on top of the wall. Mr. Anderson stated he has similar concerns about the concrete block barriers;they do not seem permanent, they are too industrial and temporary looking.There are potentially a number of different solutions to consider: • 12 X 12 pressure treated bollards are proposed for use at the end of the pedestrian way. Mr. Anderson suggested they continue these bollards(pressure treated or painted steel pipe) along the side of the parking area. • Need to be more creative on the vehicular barrier separation. Mr.Anderson agreed with Mr. Rieder and other Board members this proposed material is a significant detraction from the overall positive impact achieved with the development.This changing neighborhood will have even more pedestrian traffic, the barrier treatment design should measure up to the rest of the project. Mr. Rieder also suggested that it is not unheard of to raise the curbing (Lynnway as an example) to 9 to 10 inches. Mr. Galvin advised that the curbing is already set.The project is 80%complete. . Mr. Galvin advised this is a cost issue now because two barriers are required. He appreciates that the Board is looking for a more aesthetic treatment that is in character with the rest of the development. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 6 of 8 Mr. Rieder asked that the solution be deployed in a linear and uniform manner as the proposed design looks messy. The design pattern should be something that can be immediately perceived in total by the pedestrian to minimize trip/fall hazard and to create a harmonious appearance. Mr. Puleo asked Mr.Anderson to explain in more detail his suggestion of extending the bollards; how would they be spaced? Mr. Anderson suggested 6-feet on center so cars could not drive between them, possibly even connected via chain. Mr. Rieder also offered examples of vertical 1-beams set in the ground to prevent vehicle access. Mr. Anderson asked for clarification on the pedestrian fence material. Mr. Galvin said the proposal is to use the city's preferred fence. Mr.Anderson noted this is a sectional product, wear shows much more quickly than on other types of fence. Steel, PVC-coated is the city standard. Aluminum versions are even worse. Mr. Puleo refocused the discussion to address the applicant's need which is direction on a vehicular barrier that will satisfy the Planning Board standards. Ms. Menon summarized the Conservation Commission requirement and feedback as: a system of vehicular barriers is required to keep vehicles out of the waterway.The Chair of the Conservation Commission acknowledged that the concrete barriers are not the most aesthetic solution; the Chair is open to other appropriate vehicular barrier solutions as determined by the Planning Board. • Mr. Ready asked if this is an issue for the Design Review Board (DRB)to review. After discussion, the Board concluded it is prudent for the DRB to provide input before the Planning Board reviews this again. Mr. Anderson suggested the applicant be allowed to take the Planning Board's feedback and return with alternatives. Mr. Galvin pointed out the need to expedite decisions as they are at 80%with completion due by mid- June. The applicant is looking to get all approvals in place for occupancy. He asked if there is an option to work informally with the DRB and the Planning Board. Mr. Puleo suggested they will seek advice from the City Planner(Lynn Duncan), and if appropriate they will refer the issue to the DRB for input prior to the next planning board meeting. Meanwhile the design team should prepare alternatives given the negative feedback on the use of the proposed concrete block material.The hope is to have received input from the DRB (if appropriate)and new alternatives from the applicant for the next Planning Board meeting on April 17`". Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to table the Planning Board's discussion, to allow time to determine if the Design Review Board should have input on the proposal,seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with five(S) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. jam Q!d JNeW Business s+uyv��tx��� dv{..; - skit St i4a6i�M ems' o �'� d !x5 ;€wnnuv6 tua� .e • No old business was raised for further discussion. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 7 of 8 • Mr. Rieder asked to know the status of installation of the new track surface at Bertram Field and if there will be public access. Ms. Menon reported it has not been resurfaced yetwith the rubber, planned for this spring (unsure of timing, but this is a weather-dependent project). Mr. Rieder emphasized the value of providing access to the public. Tom Devine in the planning office has been working on this project. Ms. Menon will provide an update. Mr. Clarke raised a concern about agenda planning for the next few meetings as the schedule is getting very full. He suggested the agenda order be set to take the first couple of small items (like NRCC) first; especially those that are continued from pervious meetings. Mr. Puleo agreed and indicated the Salem Jail project will be scheduled 1" or 2nd to enable the City Planner to attend if possible (Apr 17 is next meeting date for both City Council and planning board). He acknowledged it will be helpful to set expectations in advance for time limits presenters of large projects. Mr. Clarke also requested the chair set a firm meeting end time of 10pm as the quality of the meeting deteriorates considerably after 3 hours; even if this requires adding meetings to the schedule. Mr. Ready also reminded the board the people are best served with thorough preparation by applicants, board members and staff. With the upcoming workload, we must make the necessary investment in resources to be be prepared to do the people's business even if there are several large projects together. • Mr. Puleo spoke in regards the Old Salem Jail project that was continued tonight. To move forward, the planning board should have a written opinion from the fire department on how they will support the Jail. The board collectively agreed this applicant needs to bring the original plans approved and a more complete description between the differences in the original and requested change to their next appearance before the planning board. Ms. Menon advised the applicant will be presenting some new elevations to illustrate; in general they are proposing the same number of parking spaces with a different layout, including changes to the footprint and pulling the fagade back. Mr. Puleo has requested the Fire Department provide a written review and indicate they are able to access all buildings on St. Peter Street. Mr. Rieder indicated there is a need to fix the lane striping/arrows on Norman Street near the Post Office as the current markings create a notable risk of pedestrian/vehicular accident. Ms. Menon has noted the issue and will convey it to the appropriate city department. Ad Qurnrnertt µma4YFC d i 6v iYf awlma nm&fiY.P�x iv i r °gr Estee ee ae i.x 5 SNP{ .. �... I=�w `.�..Asw, S4.c x�-rs« ,,..��r..Fen'iSd.,,..� ser•�t,��.Siwa'�.n sa�.,�UAk PF i�-TnNil�I��nuaORt�,du'3Wu:GlS"Yn'�.sSaLek��a.ti.uu nrhi �?s Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to adiourn the meetina,seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 7:45 pm. • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—April 3, 2014 Page 8 of 8 For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://Www.salem.com/PagesISa/emMA PlonMin/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 4/17/2014 • • 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,March 20,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair n MEETING AGENDA a I. ROLL CALL NT X • II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES m D • March 6, 2014 Meeting Minutes 3 • m w N N III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 '/z BOSTON STREET (Nfap 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE HEARING TO APRIL 3,2014 IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT / Knowyour iights ander the Open Meeting Law iYLG.L : 30A J 18-25 and City Ordinance J 2-2028 through J 2-2033. This notice posted on "Offipiai Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem. Mass. on A0.4 /4, go AL • at //,:32 44'-1 in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. coNovr,�.�� x City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet • PLANNING BOARD � S i►rgc�?"� Board. Date / 20 12,0 ( 4- Name 20 ( 4- Name Mailing Address Phone # E-mail Page of City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—March 20, 2014 Page 1 of 2 City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday, March 20,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 20, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:06 pm. a a x Bhp' g it.pi ilv ! k .a �d.1�r-�ik,. ^ y. 2J,`, �Snn! a :"� EY 31t w.n o r: rhw ct Eco „,, Roll Calf k u a �.a ME ,R kip. ;iia._ ,V r .#au� sil. •� z Those present were: Chuck Puleo-Chair,Tim Ready-Vice Chair, Ben Anderson, Randy Clarke and Kirt Rieder. Absent: Helen Sides, Dale Yale and Bill Griset. Also present: Dana Menon,Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. ti Approval �f YAjnUfe$iii_ i3 I t ( a k: t ¢i.� �: ,�� �m�.wX_- 4n v_ r4ini @k w ..a . . F a:a=�d�k. �ad.n,.tYs!mfi' dr�'u,-.=_.., March 6, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes • P4 Kirt Rieder identified a slight error in his first attribution under heading `Board Discussion of the geotechnical/MCP review of the site",first line words are transposed; "are there" should read "there are"..... "Mr. Rieder asked if there are off gases or does testing still need to be • done?' • P6 Kirt Rieder asked to clarify his comments by striking the phrase "screen on the Goodhue Street side". His comment should read: "Mr. Rieder followed up on the detail of street trees along the Boston Street sidewalk and thanked the design team for adding this to the renderings. He pointed out these will be young trees and will not serve as a screening device.They are a good long term investment. He encouraged the design team to realize they are in pivotal position to bridge historical and current design and believes the metal represents a good opportunity to do so." No other comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Kirt Rieder made a motion to approve the minutes,seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous with five (5) in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr.Anderson, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Rieder)and none (0) opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. .t ti�`rn+iti' 'trz_ -v3.. I�y Yi 1Pg1 iii, -' v 'i rtm y 3 r �a,�n4 Regular Agenda�,qti s � =` �3; ;Rk � „�. ° rauau h Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. • Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92'/: Boston St(Map 15, Lot 299; Map 16, Lot 139) .. City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—March 20, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Applicant requests to continue hearing to April 3,2014. Mr. Puleo asked if there was a letter formally documenting the continuance request. Ms. Menon confirmed, and also advised the letter from Mr. Anderson (dated 3/20/2014)with list of questions/requests for additional information has been forwarded to the applicant. Motion and Vote: Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing until Apr 3, 2014, seconded by Tim Ready. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Old/New Business��- ,12ii _m nv..sii3� Yn'vi. �11i 3.'il'�N' el}Sr. No old business was raised for further discussion. Planning Office has received a Chapter 91 Waterway License Report detailing a project to repair and modify the existing bulkhead at 8-10 Franklin Street is available for board member review. She will be forwarding more information regarding the project. Mr. Ready recognized the attendance of Councilor Furey (City Council Liaison to the Planning Board and Councilor-at-Large), seated in the audience. Mr. Ready asked if the board had received an update about any progress being made at the Council on Aging site. Members responded anecdotally: • Mr. Puleo understood test borings had been done last November. • Ms. Menon reported they are currently looking at flood elevations. • Mr. Clarke advised there was recent media coverage on the exploratory work being done at the site. s .i v' c3 `S^ iI! r 3 i .;(9i :£ { EI .'Y 3 !j llJ .i RYL,t ti`. _3 13E16'+*C9`-e '�I? "+i l f('i{l I S t t E *4 Adjournments„ ry( ,' ... „v,sGa Fr kt Motion and Vote: Kirt Rieder made a motion to adiourn the meeting, seconded by Randy Clarke. The vote was unanimous with five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo, Mr. Ready, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rieder)and none(0)opposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a part of these minutes. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 7:16 pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address or project at: http://www.solem.com/Pages/SalemMA Plan Min/ Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk • Approved by the Planning Board on 4/3/2014 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,March 6, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair n MEETING AGENDA rn r rn I. ROLL CALL �T Dm 00 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES rri w D • February 20,2014 Meeting Minutes 3 • 3 QQ J> W N III. REGULARAGENDA 00 Project. Continuation of the public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 V, BOSTON STREET(Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) Project: Endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR) Applicant: PETER K. HANTZOPOULOS,TRUSTEE Location: 13 CHERRY HILL AVENUE (Map 14,Lot 225) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR PLANNING BOARD ACTION IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT • Knovyour rigbts under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L c. 30A 118-25 and City Ordinance f 2-2028 through If 2-2033. This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on -rub ' t{ at b' YjaA in accordance with MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DuNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Dana Menon, Staff Planner DATE: March 3,2014 RE: Planning Board Meeting—March 6,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Planner's Memo D Draft Meeting Minutes -February 20,2014 • Materials for the agenda items are included in the packet for the 3/06/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS Discussion and Vote—Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92A BOSTON STREET (NRCC). Specifically,the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. This will be a continuation of the hearing on this application. The hearing was opened at the February 20, 2014 meeting. The Board voted to 1) refer the applicant to the DRB for review and 2) to continue the hearing to the March 6th Planning Board meeting. The applicant will be appearing before the Design Review Board on March 5th. Any pertinent information/materials resulting from the meeting with the DRB will be supplied to the Planning Board on the 6th. *Any members who missed the February 20th meeting must listen to the audio recording of that meeting and sign an affidavit stating that they listened to the audio,in order to remain eligible to vote on this application. This will also be true for any member who misses any future meetings at which this application is discussed. • City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—March 3, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Discussion and Vote—Request of Peter K. Hanzopoulos to extend deadline for Planning Board action on an application for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control(ANR), for the property located at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue (Map 14, Lot 225). The applicant submitted an application for an ANR plan and an application for a Waiver from Frontage. The ANR cannot be approved without approval of the Waiver from Frontage. There was insufficient time to advertise the Waiver request for the March 61h meeting. The applicant has requested to hear the ANR and Waiver Request at the April 3,d meeting. As a decision by the Board is required on an ANR within 21 days of its submission, the applicant has submitted a Request for Extension of Deadline for Planning Board Final Action form. The Board must vote at this upcoming meeting(March 6) on whether to grant the requested extension. On January 29,2014 The Zoning Board of Appeals issued a Decision granting Variances from the minimum required lot area, the minimum required lot frontage,and the minimum required lot width for the creation of two lots out of the existing lot at 13 Cherry Hill Avenue. A copy of that Decision will be enclosed in your packets for the April 3,d meeting, for your reference. • • Meeting Sign-In Sheet City of Salem a 4' �9 !71RS�, Board: PLANNING BOARD Date Name Mailing Address Phone # E-mail Gfff�f J-L. rt alrf /S er6lt , 3�f/1.{SUTA6ja �.?61fT�t 7�1�249-o'+13 9�{-ti.cbt��-FS/�+��.. cu�v. \.2 e� uw I (rJ �LKi� r \6 cQ�S �^ (��a i C2a\kj • Page of 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, February 20,2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair � N O MEETING AGENDA m r1n AT W �— N I. ROLL CALL NmO D m D 3 _ • II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • December 5,2013 Meeting Minutes N III. REGULARAGENDA Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit,Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping,and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST(Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST (Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST(Map 34,Lot 408) APPLICANT REQUESTS TO CONTINUE HEARING TO APRIL 3,2014 Project: Endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR) Applicant: FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR REAL ESTATE LP • Location: 24 FORT AVENUE;EXISTING POWER PLANT This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on ��,b �C40 at 111�' m in accordan a with MGL Chap 30A, Sections 18-25. Aity of Salem Planning Board genda for February 20,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office budding,with associated parking,landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 'h BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knowyour sights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A J' 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through§2-2033. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSE I'S 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 W W W SALEM.COM City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board b6 Date Name Mailing Address Phone # Email c v v -P 3 ` Duw ( c 04 QaT l �b� imevsi, a� Page__ of CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 FEB 14 A8. 14 FILE CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex,Room 313, 120 Washington St., Salem, MA Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. ROLL CALL • II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • December 5,2013 Meeting Minutes III. REGULAR AGENDA Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review,and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant. THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL&SUITES,LLC Location: 19 CONGRESS ST(Map 34,Lot 489);23 CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 447); 223-231 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 446);235 DERBY ST (Map 34,Lot 445); CONGRESS ST (Map 34,Lot 408); 13-15 HERBERT ST(Map 35,Lot 321);25 PEABODY ST (Map 34,Lot 436);THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34,Lot 408) Project: Endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control (ANR) Applicant: FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR REAL ESTATE LP Location: 24 FORT AVENUE;EXISTING POWER PLANT • L City of Salem Planning Board Agenda for February 20,2014 Meeting Page 2 of 2 • Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping,and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM, INC. Location: 70-92 1/2 BOSTON STREET (Map 15,Lot 299;Map 16,Lot 139) IV. OLD/NEW BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Knomyour rghtr under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L a 30A§ 18-25 and City Ordinance§2-2028 tbraugb J 2-2033. • This notice posted on "Office I Bulletin Board " City Hall, Salem, Mass. on Lb I LJ Loq at 8 ', 1 y� in accordance With MGL Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSE 7S 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 . WWW,SALEM.COM 9 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1014 FEB -U P 3: 32 FILE t, CITY CLERK. SALEM, MASS. Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC for a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street; Congress Street Map 34,'Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34, Lot 408 (B5); and the parking lots at 13-15 Herbert Street (R2) and 25 Peabody Street(B5). Specifically, the application proposes the demolition of the existing Manna Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. •The public hearing will be held on Thursday,February 20,2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington Street, P, floor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the application and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department of Planning & Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. ( & i h Charles M. Puleo, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: February 6 and February 13, 2014 This notice posted on "Officia Bulletin Board" aa1 Know Your Ar'hts under the 0 en Meetin LawM.G.PV3�Ai 1��� � F) nanee 2; 2 u 2-203 & P $. at3:3a P M din aror anc w�fR 1�1 hap. 0A, Sections 18-25. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - W'WWS,ALEM.COM m CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD '2014 FEB -U P 112 FILE }# CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. Public Hearing Notice City of Salem Planning Board Will hold a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem,Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 '/2 BOSTON STREET (NRCC). Specifically, the:application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. The public hearing will be held on Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at 120 Washington Street, 3rd aoor, room 313, in accordance with Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. A copy of the pplication and plans are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the Department of Planning& Community Development, Third Floor, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. yn Charles M. Pulco, Chair Planning Board Ad to Run Dates in Salem News: February 6 and February 13, 2014. This notice postod on "Office Bulletin Board" City P I+ 3 S,'IMillaccordanceW With at 3"��- MGL Chap. 30A, SeuUons 18-25. • Know Your Rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L c. 30A 18-25 and City Ordinance Y 2-2028 through 2-2033. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSEns 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.S.ALEMCUM ��tin"ulrTg�o \ CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET ♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELE:978-619-5685 ♦ FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GoONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIREcrOR STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Dana Menon,Staff Planner DATE: February 13,2013 RE: Planning Board Meeting—February 20,2014 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda D Planner's Memo ➢ Draft Meeting Minutes -December 5,2013 • D Materials for Regular Agenda Materials for the agenda items are included in the packet for the 2/20/2014 meeting. Here is a summation of the requests and background information for each item: I. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS Discussion and Vote—Application of The Salem Waterfront Hotel& Suites, LLC for a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review, and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 19 & 23 Congress St; 223-231 & 235 Derby Street; Congress Street Map 34, Lot 408; the Remaining Land of Pickering Wharf Condominium Trust, Map 34, Lot 408 (B5); and the parking lots at 13-15 Herbert Street (R2) and 25 Peabody Street (B5). Specifically, the application proposes the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. The petitioner proposes to demolish the existing Marina building and construct a second building to be part of the Salem Waterfront Hotel&Suites. They propose to augment on-site parking with satellite parking in two off-site lots: 25 Peabody Street and 1345 Herbert Street. The submitted plan and detail sheets do not show the required upgrades to the existing Harborwalk in Pickering Wharf,specifically the sections along the hotel expansion site and from Finz to Victoria Station. These improvements are described in the Environmental Impact Statement submitted to the Board,pages 11-15. These upgrades are required by DEP under the Chapter 91 Waterways licensing for the project, because of the substitutions and allowances that were afforded to the Waterfront Hotel through the Salem • Harbor Plan Update process. The upgrades must comply with the City's specific Harborwalk standards (as executed in the recently completed section of the Harborwalk). Attachment A is an excerpt from the Salem City of Salem: Planning Board Staff Memorandum—February 20, 2014 Page 2of3 Harbor Plan Update,which discusses these requirements. It is important to note that the walkway is required to be a fulldear ten feet"in width. It appears that the Harborwalk at Congress Street is less than 10'wide • PP � , as the rail on the Congress St Bridge and the proposed hotel turret create a pinch-point in the walk. The application has been sent to the Building Commissioner, the City Engineer, the Board of Health,the Disabilities Commission, the Department of Public Services, the Conservation Commission, Fire Prevention, the Fire Department, the Police Department,and the School Department for comment. As of this memorandum, the Conservation Agent has responded, commenting that the"project requires an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission". Comments received from the other departments will be brought to the meeting. Discussion and Vote—Application of FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR REAL ESTATE LP for endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision Control(ANR) to subdivide the property 24 FORT AVENUE. The petitioner proposes to divide the existing lot into two lots. Lot 1 encompasses the proposed Footprint Power power plant. The parcel is zoned as Industrial. The two proposed lots both exceed the 150-foot minimum lot frontage requirement. Discussion and Vote—Application of DHM Realty Trust/Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem, Inc. for a Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 70 TO 92 '/: BOSTON STREET (NRCC). Specifically, the application proposes the redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building,with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. The petitioner proposes to redevelop the Flynntan site. The three existing structures will be demolished, and • a new building will be constructed to house the Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem,as well as additional tenants on the top floor. The site largely lies in the North River Canal Corridor (NRCC) and the Entrance Corridor Overlay(ECOD). A small portion of the site lies in a Residential Two-Family(R2) zone,a Business Highway (B2) zone,and the Transitional Overlay District. Attachment B is a copy of ECOD and NRCC regulations from the Salem Zoning Ordinance. Section 8.4.16 notes that"Action sball not be taken on any plan until it has received a recommendation from the Design Review Board... concerning the design of the pmjeni" At the hearing, the Board should refer the applicant to the DRB for review of the project. The applicant is aware that DRB review is required. After the DRB has completed review of the project, they will submit comments and recommendations to the Planning Board. The Ordinance also references the NRCC Plan,which can be found on the City's website: http://www.saletn.com/Pages/`SalemMA DPCD/studies (at the bottom of the page). Please review the NRCC guidelines, and assess the proposed development based on those guidelines. A factor that is not fully addressed in the application materials are traffic studies and impacts. The applicant should submit a traffic analysis study, and a traffic peer review should be conducted. It is noted that Goodhue Street is currently one-way from Boston Street to Beaver Street. The proposed site plan shows three entrance/exit points around the Goodhue Street/Beaver Street intersection. The City is undertaking improvements to the Grove Street corridor through a MassWorks grant,including the installation of a roundabout at the Grove St/Goodhue St/Beaver St intersection. Construction of these improvements will begin in early summer 2014. Conceptual plans for these improvements were done as part of the NRCC Transportation Study,but surveying and technical plans have yet to be completed. The configuration of the entrance/exit drives to the proposed basement garage must be coordinated with the Grove St. improvements. • a City of Salem:Planning Board Staff Memorandum—February 20,2014 Page 3 of 3 • It is noted that a public meeting with the Mack Park Neighborhood Association is scheduled for April to review the draft plans. The application has been sent to the Building Commissioner, the City Engineer,the Board of Health, the Disabilities Commission,the Conservation Commission,Fire Prevention,and the Fire Department. Comments received from the departments will be brought to the meeting. As of this memorandum, the Conservation Agent has responded, commenting"If the property is within a flood zone,an Order of Conditions or negative determination of applicability will be required from the Conservation Commission". According to the current FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM),the site is not in a flood zone. The applicant chose to base their application on the new FEMA FIRM Preliminary Map,which does designate a small portion of the site as a Zone"AE"Flood Hazard. The Conservation Commission has decided to evaluate projects based on the new FEMA FIRM Preliminary Maps. FEMA has stated that the new Preliminary Maps will be effective on July 16,2014. II. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Attachments Attachment A—Excerpt from the Salem Harbor Plan Attachment B—Section 8.2 Entrance Corridor Overlay District(ECOD)and Section 8.4 North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District(NRCC), of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. • i CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 2014 FEB 24 A 11; 45 FILE 0 CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. Form A — Decision 24 Fort Aveue On February 20, 2014, the Salem Planning Board voted 7-0 (Charles Puleo, Dale Yale, Ben Anderson, Kirt Rieder,Tim Ready, Helen Sides, and Bill Griset) to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan: 1. Applicant: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP, a Delaware Limited Partnership 2. Location: 24 Fort Avenue, Map 41, Lots 271, 273 & 321 Project Description: The applicant requests to subdivide the property at 24 Fort Avenue into two lots,Lot 1 and Lot 2 as shown on the plan titled, "Salem Harbor Power Station, 24 Fort Avenue, Plan of Land located in Salem,Massachusetts (Essex County)" dated February 10, 2014, prepared by • Meridian Associates. Lot 1 and Lot 2 each have adequate frontage on Fort Avenue. The land is the site of the existing power plant. Sincerely, Charles M. Puleo Chair Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINUON SIREET, SALEM, M ASSACHUSE'ITS 01970 - PIIONE 97$.619.5685 FAa 978.740.0404 ' \Vl1'q'.SALE:b1.CONl J • City of Salem Planning Board Meeting Minutes Thursday, February 20,2014 A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313,Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:03 pm. Roll Call Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair,Tim Ready,Vice Chair, Dale Yale,Ben Anderson,Bill Griset, Helen Sides and Kitt Rieder. Absent: Randy Clarke and George McCabe. Also present: Dana Menon, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick,Planning Board Recording Clerk. Chairman Puleo opened the meeting with the introduction of new planning board member William (Bill) Griset,Jr: Bill was appointed to replace Mark George and serve the remainder of his term expiring December 14, 2014. Now a Salem resident,Mr.Griset previously served the town of Reading in multiple appointed and elected capacities over the past 30 years. His roles included serving on the town finance committee, school committee,community planning and development commission among others while maintaining an active legal practice as a civil trial attorney. Bill's extensive background in legal and municipal affairs has provided him the skills and experience to understand the importance of a healthy balance between residential and commercial interests in a • community. Please join me in welcoming Bill to the planning board. Chairman Puleo also noted the attendance of Councilor Furey, Councilor Gerard,and Councilor Eppley at the meeting. Approval of Minutes December 5, 2013 Draft Meeting Minutes Mr. Anderson called for a grammatical edit at P3, para 4, line 12,insert"asked." Sentence should read, "Mr. Anderson asked about a Siamese connection." No other comments or corrections were made by the Planning Board members. Motion and Vote: Kart Rieder made a motion to a4brove the minutes as corrected, seconded by Ben Anderson. The vote was unanimous gith five (5)in favor(Mr. Puleo.Mr. Ready,Ms. Yale,Mr.Anderson. and Mr. Rieder.J and Wane Q) 4bosed. The decision is herrbv incor2orated and made abart of these minutes. Project: Public hearing on the petition for a Planned United Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the demolition of the existing Marina Building and the redevelopment of that site to include an expansion of the existing Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites with associated parking and landscaping, and off-site parking at 13-15 Herbert Street and 25 Peabody Street. Applicant: THE SALEM WATERFRONT HOTEL & SUITES, LLC • City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20,2014 Page 2 of 8 Locations: 19 Congress St (Map 34,Lot 489),23 Congress St (map 34, Lot 447),223-231 • Derby St (Map 34,Lot 446),235 Derby St (Map 34, Lot 445), Congress St (Map 34,Lot 408), 13-15 Herbert St (map 35, Lot 321), 25 Peabody St (Map 34, Lot 436),THE REMAINING LAND OF PICKERING WHARF CONDOMINIUM TRUST (Map 34, Lot 408). Documents & Exhibitions: ➢ Application date-stamped 01/30/2014 and accompanying materials,including "Environmental Impact Statement Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion" dated January 2014 by Susan St. Pierre Consulting Services, and plans titled"Salem Waterfront Hotel Expansion" dated 1/6/2014, by Patrowicz Land Development Engineering, Symmes Maim &McKee Associates, and James K. Emmanuel Associates landscape architects. Attorney Joseph Cortenti, 63 Federal Street, presents the petition on behalf of the applicant. Arty. Correnti requested to continue the hearing to the April 3, 2014 Planning Board meeting due to availability of project consultants. Motion and Vote: Ben Anderson made a motion to continue the public hearing untilAbril3, 2014 seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven �Zin favor(Mr. Puleo.Ms. Yale,Mr.Anderson,Mr. Ready.Ms. Sides, Mr. Griset, and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)o4hosed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made mart of these minutes. Project: Endorsement of a plan believed not to require approval under Subdivision • Control(ANR) Applicant: FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR REAL ESTATE LP Location: 24 Fort Avenue; Existing Power Plant Documents &Exhibitions: ➢ Application date-stamped 02/12/2014 and accompanying materials,including a plan titled "Salem Harbor Power Station, 24 Fort Avenue,Plan of Land located in Salem, Massachusetts (Essex County)" dated February 10, 2014, prepared by Meridian Associates. ➢ "Public Access Plan Upon Completion of New Facility" and"Conceptual Future Public Access Plan" dated July 24,2013,prepared by CookFox Architects,provided by Ms. Menon from the materials approved by the Planning Board as part of the Board's August 1, 2013 Decision on the petitions of Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development,LP for a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the property located at 24 Fort Avenue. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal St,presents the petition on the applicant's behalf. Phil Pattison of Meridian Associates and George Wilson of Footprint Power are also present. It is proposed to divide the 65-acre site into two lots: lot 1 at 23.7 acres to include the power plant;lot 2 at 42.3 acres to include land to be developed in the future. Both lots have the appropriate frontage on Fort Avenue to comply with ANR requirements. J City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20,2014 Page 3 of 8 • Planning board members asked for clarification on the following issues, during the discussion all parties were able to consult the submitted plan and the "Public Access Plan Upon Completion of New Facility" and "Conceptual Future Public Access Plan": • Mr. Puleo asked if public pedestrian access toward the waterfront is all in lot 1, following the berm, oris some public access included in lot 2? Mr. Wilson clarifies that the.pedestrian access is on lot 1. • Mr. Rieder asked if the pedestrian walkway aligns with Webster Street. Mr. Puleo clarifies that the path follows the berm. • Mr. Puleo asked if there would be any easements. Attorney Correnti replied that yes, there will be several easements between the two lots for various types of access. For example, the National Grid sub-station will need access.Atty. Corrend further clarifies that the public access path on the berm does not continue all the way to the waterfront—it stops at a view point. • Mr.Anderson asked for clarification of any restrictions placed on lot 2, as the site is not being developed at this time. Specifically,if that parcel is sold, does the new property owner have the opportunity to develop that parcel as they wish?Atty. Correnti responds yes,but development of.the site would have to be in accordance with zoning and designated port area restrictions, etc. Mr. Anderson expressed concern that future development plans for lot 2 might eliminate the previously-agreed upon access. Atty. Correnti responds that it has been made very clear that access will be preserved. For example, there is a wharfage agreement being finalized between the city and Footprint to give the City access tothe pier • for 99 years. Ms. Menon advised that the original Planning Board decision (August 1,2014) specifies that any future development of lot 2 will be subject to planning board review and approval under the PUD special permit process. Arty. Correnti further clarifies that the PUD is identified as a 65-acre parcel. If/when that gets subdivided, the PUD will still apply to any subdivision of that land in the future. Development will be under the PUD special permit. Mr. Puleo asked about the demarcation of zoning on the proposed plan. Arty. Correnti clarified. Motion and Vote: Helen Sides made a motion to 4hrvve the ANR, seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven �)in favor(Mr. Puleo.Ms. Yale,Mr.Anderson,Mr. Ready.Ms. Sides,Mr. Griset, and Mr. Riederf and none �q) obbosed. The decision is hereby incot4orated and made mart of these minutes. The ANR plan"Salem Harbor Power Station, 24 Fort Avenue, Plan of Land located in Salem, Massachusetts (Essex County",prepared by Meridian Associates, dated February 10, 2014,was endorsed by Mr. Puleo,Mr. Ready,Ms. Yale,Mr. Rieder, and Ms. Sides. Project: A public hearing for a petition requesting Site Plan Review and a Flood Hazard District Special Permit, for the proposed redevelopment of the former Flynntan site into a medical office building, with associated parking, landscaping, and demolition of existing buildings. Applicant: DHM REALTY TRUST/PEDIATRIC ASSOCIATES OF GREATER SALEM,INC. • Locations: 70-92 V2 Boston St (Map 15,Lot 299; Map 16,Lot 139) City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20, 2014 Page 4 of 8 Documents &Exhibitions: • ➢ Application date-stamped 01/30/2014 and accompanying materials,including a plan titled "Site Development Plans for Medical Office Building—Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem 70-92 1/2 Boston Street, Salem, MA" dated January 2014, drawn by Perkins + Will, Griffin Engineering Group,LLC, and LeBlanc Survey Associates. ➢ Petitioner's slide presentation delivered at the meeting. Attomey Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal St, presents the petition on behalf of the applicant. Other presenters included Mark McKenna of Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem (FAGS),Bob Griffin, civil engineer, and Romeo Moreira of Perkins + Will Architects. Mr. McKenna gave a brief overview of the history of the practice (since 1977) and its commitment to staying in Salem. The practice has expanded to occupy three buildings along Highland Avenue. They have been looking for a location to enable them to consolidate operations into one facility, remain in Salem, and provide ample parking and safer access for visiting patients and staff. Arty. Correnti outlined the permitting path for the project; there are two requests tonight: Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review. The applicant will also file with the Conservation Commission for a determination of applicability. . They will be requesting a demolition delay waiver from the Historical Commission as some buildings on site are more than 50 years old. The applicant is also applying to the Design Review Board (DRB), as the site is within the North River Canal Corridor (NRCC). They will be appearing before the DRB at a special meeting on March 5, 2014. • Mr. Griffin continued the presentation with site history and the development plan summary including historical and present-day photos and conceptual design drawings. At a future presentation to the planning board, the applicant will have an expert speak to environmental contamination and clean-up history of the site. An underground fuel oil tank leaked #6 fuel oil. This has been cleaned up and the proposed plan is to pave over this portion of the site for parking. A small strip of the site along Goodhue Street is in a flood zone in the new preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps released by FEMA. The map will be become finalized sometime this year, so we're taking a conservative approach to include that permit in our process. The site is 400' from the North River canal so it is not considered to be rivetfront and there are no wetlands on site. The applicant is coordinating with various city departments and utilities. Site History: • pre-1900 M Robson Leather Co and residential • 1922-1988 Flynn and Sons Leather • 1988-1999 Small commercial operations (recycling) • 1999-present,vacant • Late 1990'2 or early 2000's City took the property and started remediation work • 2006 City of Salem sold the land to 42"d LLC who has done significant site remediation • I City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20,2014 Page 5 of 8 • Development Plan Summary: • 3 stories of office space (approximately 40,000 square feet) plus 1 level of garage parking • Elevation from Boston Street shows only 2 levels and building is set back; elevation from Goodhue Street shows 4 levels including elevator access. • Entrance on Boston Street is for patients and visitors, entrance on Goodhue Street is for staff. • Landscaping to include a garden space along Boston Street between the new office building and the adjacent Dunkin Donuts property line, and improvements to storm water management. • Overall building size is 58,000 gross square feet. • For parking, there are 46 spaces off Boston Street for visitors, 37 spaces in garage for staff, plus 12 surface spaces off Goodhue Street adjacent to the maintenance area. Mr. Puleo asked if the parking plan accommodates future tenants in the Yd floor space. Mr. Moreira replied yes, the plan accommodates future tenants. Mr. Puleo asked if there is anything hazardous in the existing buildings that might delay demolition. Mr. Griffin replies that the buildings are clean and ready for demolition. Building Architecture Overview: Presentation by Romeo Moreira &Allen Buie of Perkins + Will Architects: Presenters advised these are conceptual plans intended to show how the applicant • intends to use the space, and as such, subject to change. The site is approximately 1.6 acres. They reviewed the site context factors that contributed to the design concept including: linear textures, bay windows on adjacent residential units, largely 3-story buildings, masonry bases, clapboard siding and brick exteriors. Two extensive contamination areas within the site are marked on the site plan and presentations. The building is positioned to minimize excavation and contain the contaminated areas. Particular attention was given to maintain the residential scale on Boston Street. Care was also taken to ensure the Goodhue Street side of the building is attractive - the staff balcony and visitor respite space provide interest and the garage has a screened exterior.The building design provides for separation of staff entrances from patient/visitor entrances. Proposed building materials include: board-formed concrete,perforated metal to screen parking, corrugated metal panel, smooth bronze colored panel and glass. No mechanical units are planned for the roof, so the Grove Street buildings looking down onto the proposed building will not see or hear mechanicals. Some solar energy applications are under consideration for the roof The first floor on the Boston Street fagade features lots of glass to overlook the landscaping/garden area and provide natural light.The top level of the building (4s floor) is currently un-developed shell space awaiting future tenants. Mr. Rieder complimented the applicant on the content and appearance of the proposed development of the site, singling out the transition of massing from Boston Street to Goodhue Street as especially positive given the change in site elevation and the adjacent storage building. He requested the design team look at the relationship to the Dunkin Donuts building and to give more thought to the proposed garden. Mr. Rieder suggested trees be planted adjacent to the sidewalk to improve the pedestrian experience, and that the storm water management plan maximize percolation • and infiltration into the ground rather than into the storm drain system. City of Salem–Planning Board Meeting Minutes–February 20,2014 Page 6 of 8 Ms. Sides also commended the applicant on the proposed development. She encouraged the design • team to provide a public entrance on Goodhue Street to anticipate a significant number of pedestrian patients arriving from that direction, and noting it is a long walk around,particularly for a parent with young children. Mr.Anderson commended the thought process and presentation. He requested at their next presentation that the applicant provide more drawings to show the views from the different approach corridors;what is the appearance coming down Boston Street from Peabody and from Walgreens; and what is the view from Bridge Street?All views presented tonight were quite close to the site and/or building. Mr.Anderson would like to see some finish boards showing exterior colors and finishes. Mr. Rieder followed up on this topic and asked about the view from the Grove Street residential area. He also asked what the plan is for the area along the property line by the cycle shop on Goodhue Street. The board generally discussed the concern that the hillside grade between the cycle shop property line and the proposed office building could become a "cow path" pedestrian short cut to Boston Street, and encouraged the design team to further address this part of the lot. Mr. Rieder complimented the applicant on the fine degree of texture and interest on the conceptual plans. He is looking for a good set of presentation materials to send to the Design Review Board. Ms. Yale asked if the applicant was coordinating with the appropriate parties for the traffic generated by the site, and with the City's plans for the Goodhue Street improvements.. Mr. Moreira responded they are coordinating with Fay Spofford and Thorndike (the City's consultant on the • Goodhue Street improvements) to share plans and look at traffic improvements. Chairman Puleo opened the bearing to the public for comment Dean Boucher, owner of 75 and 79 Boston Street, his tenants currently park in front of Flynntan on Boston Street,will this on-street parking still exist?The applicant replied they are not proposing any on-street parking changes, and will be improving sidewalks on the Flynntan side of Boston Street. Tom Furey, Councilor-at- Large, enthusiastically praised this exciting project, reminding those in attendance that the Blubber Hollow neighborhood was once a thriving economic engine for Salem. He invited the audience to consider how different this neighborhood will look 10-15 years from now as the projects currently underway are completed. This is a signature statement of progress for Salem. Pat Liberti, 3 Lions Lane, Salem, speaking as co-chair of the Ward 4 group. Generally supportive of the project but did want to relay the collective concerns from recent Ward 4 meetings: • The proposed exterior material proposed for the building doesn't fit into the neighborhood—particularly the proposed use of metal. • Traffic coming out of the Boston Street parking lot needs to be synchronized with streets in the immediate area and possibly re-position the traffic lights. There is a problem now with Hanson Street and Grove Street traffic turning into Boston Street. • J� City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20,2014 Page 7 of 8 David Eppley,Ward 4 Councilor, and abutter-to-an-abutter of the project—lives at 69 Boston Street, across from Dunkin Donuts. Stated he is pleased with the project and thinks it is a good entrance corridor improvement. Spoke to reinforce resident concerns reported by Pat Liberti. The proposed parking entrance of the new building is not perpendicular to Hanson Street,which may pose additional problem to an already difficult intersection. Hanson doesn't have a light.The city may need to adjust traffic lights in this area. Jim Treadwell, 36 Felt Street. Concerned this project as proposed may not completely meet the North River Canal Corridor (NRCC) master plan. He noted that the review process for 28 Goodhue was lengthy but it met the NRCC master plan requirements and achieved a good result. He reminded the planning board that the NRCC master plan calls for materials that harmonize with the area, and to double check whether or not the 95 proposed parking spaces comply with zoning requirements. He requested the planning board consider the applicant's proposed development in relation to 28 Goodhue Street. He also encouraged collaboration between the applicant and the owners of the adjacent Dunkin Donuts location. He advised the planning board and audience that the April meeting of the Mack Park Association will include a presentation on this project, and asked the applicant if a copy of tonight's presentation could be made available. Mr. Correnti, spokesman for the applicant,agreed to make an electronic copy of the presentation available via the city planning office. Beth Gerard,Ward 6 Councilor. Stated she is very supportive of the project, and asked Mr. Rieder to clarify his recommendation regarding trees. Mr. Rieder advised he is not recommending trees be • added to the Boston Street sidewalk,but rather requested the applicant to move the proposed trees as shown on the conceptual plan closer to the sidewalk to provide shade for pedestrians. Dana Menon, Salem City Staff Planner, confirmed the Salem Design Review Board meeting is scheduled for Mar 5, 2014, 6:30pm, on the third floor of 120 Washington Street. Motion and Vote: Ke Rieder made a motion to refer the petition to the Salem Design Review Board, to be opened at their meetinv on March S. 2014, held on the third floor of 120 Washington Street seconded by Bill Griset The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo.Mr. Ready Ms. Yale Mr.Anderson Ms Sides and none (0) otposed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made a-part of these minutes. Motion and Vote: Tim Readv made a motion to continue public hearing to the March 6, 2014 Planning Board meeting, on the third-floor of 120 Washington Street, seconded by Kirt Rieder. The vote was unanimous with seven (7)in favor(Mr. Puleo.Ms. Yale,Mr.Anderson,Mr. Readv Ms. Sides Mr. Griset. and Mr. Rieder)and none (0)gaosed. The decision is hereby incorporated and made apart of these minutes. Old/New Business Mr. Puleo advised that the correction of road striping on Trader's Way is still pending. Ms. Menon reported she mentioned the issue to the building inspector who was not sure if this is a planning board matter. Mr. Puleo stated he understands the correct striping is shown on the Home Depot plan on file in the City planning office. The issue needs to be addressed when weather permits. V City of Salem—Planning Board Meeting Minutes—February 20, 2014 Page 8 of 8 Councilor Gerard asked to address the planning board in warm appreciation of their support during her tenure as the recording clerk for the planning board. She offered her sincerest thanks for their patience and efforts to expand her understanding of technical planning board matters, and warmly told board members their commitment to serving the city inspired her to run for public office. Adjournment Motion and Vote: Tim Readv made a motion to 40urn the meeting, seconded by Dale Yale. The vote was unanimous with seven ( ) in favor Wr. Puleo.Ms. Yale,Mr.Anderson,Mr. Readv Ms. Sides Mr. Gruet and Mr. Rieder)and none (.L Posed The decision is hereby incorporated and made apart of these minutes. Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 8:55 pm. For actions where the decisions have not been fully written into these minutes, copies of the decisions have been posted separately by address orpmject at.•http:ll www..ralem.conr/Pagesl SalemMA Planiblinl Respectfully submitted, Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk Approved by the Planning Board on 3/6/2014 • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD `r -E 1014 JAN 31 A 0; 11 FILE ti Meeting'Cancellation Notice You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board's regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, February 6'h at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street, has been canceled due to a lack of agenda items. Charles M- Puleo, Chair Salem Planning Board • This notice posted on "OfficiAl Bulletin Board" City Hall, Salem, Mass. on /gctuL( &lr &/f- at 9-%� >9 in accordant th MqEChap.30A, Sections 18-25. Kmw)utrny.*tff&the Open MErtingLawM.GL, c 30A § 18-25and,CityOAnance§ 2-2028 thnxii§ 2-2033. • toCITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Meeting Cancellation Notice You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board's regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,January 16`h at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street, has been canceled due to a lack of agenda items. C" �k . -�6/� Charles M. Puleo, Chair Salem Planning Board 0 C") a rR n L tir.. 1 j,r1) r 3 3 � b Uj � J i This notice posted on "Official Iletin Board"�J City Hall, Salem, Mass. on ( 9 �/ at Qf�f7o�n accordance M L Chap. 30A, Sections 18-25. Knomyour rghts under the Open Meeting Lam M.G.L a 30A g 18-25 and City Ordinance 5 2-2028 through g 2-2033. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM.COM 4 1