Salem Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
April 19, 2007
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 19, 2007, in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts at 7:00 p.m.
Those present were: John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanagh, Chuck Puleo, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, and Christine Sullivan. Also present were Staff Planner Frank Taormina, and Ian Fullerton, Clerk.
Members Absent: Walter Power and Timothy Ready
Mr. Puleo acted as Chairman of the Planning Board in Mr. Power’s absence.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Puleo reviewed the minutes for the April 5th, 2007 meeting.
Mr. Puleo suggested the revision of a statement on page 7 made by Merhalski concerning the maintenance responsibilities of the condominium association.
Mr. Kavanagh explained that if the condominium association wished to ask city council to accept Tide’s Lane, they would be required to enter into a contractual agreement with the city of Salem requiring them to have insurance which would indemnify the City of Salem in the event of any accidents or claims upon Tide’s Lane after it had become a public way. He added that the condominium association’s responsibilities remain the same regardless of whether the City Council approves Tide’s Lane as a public.
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Ms. Lombardini to approve the amended minutes, seconded by Mr. Kavanagh, and approved (7-0).
Ms. Hanscom stated that her approval of the amended minutes was on the condition that the Mr. Kavanagh’s clarification of Mr. Merhalski’s statement be reflected in the decision for the Tide’s Lane application. Mr. Puleo suggested that the approval of the minutes be postponed until that passage accurately reflects the approved amendment which the Planning Board agreed to at the April 5th 2007 meeting.
A motion was made by Ms. Sullivan to reconsider the approval of the amended minutes, seconded by Mr. Kavanagh, and approved (7-0).
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Mr. Kavanagh to postpone approval of the April 5th 2007 minutes until May 3rd 2007, seconded by Mr. Moustakis, and approved (7-0).
Public Hearing - Waiver From Frontage - 12 Larkin Lane/19 Victory Road (Map 42, Lot 45) - Melissa Shea
Melissa Shea addressed the Planning Board in regards to a Waiver of Frontage for 12 Larkin Lane/19 Victory Road (Map 42, Lot 45). Ms. Shea stated that she had gone before the ZBA last month to petition the re-creation of the property line between the two properties. Mr. Shea stated they had originally bought the two parcels, and after 3 years the two lots merged into one, adding that that the ZBA had approved the frontage.
Mr. Puleo asked if they were planning to fill in the swimming pool. Ms. Shea stated that they were, and that they planned to see the two lots.
At this point the hearing was opened to public comment.
Alison Bruno of 21 Victory Way asked to see the plans from the application. Mr. Taormina showed her the plans.
At this point the public hearing was closed.
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Mr. Moustakis to approve the waiver from frontage, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0).
Mr. Kavanagh stated that for registry purposes a Mylar plan would be required. Ms. Shea stated that she had a Mylar plan at her house and offered to get it so that it could be signed that night.
Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval - 12 Larkin Lane/19 Victory Road (Map 42, Lot 45) - Melissa Shea
There being no questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to approved the Form A Application, seconded by Mr. Moustakis, and approved (7-0)
Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval - 2-6 Hayward Street (Map 27, Lots 0465, 0466) - Theodore Morris, Karen Morris, Anthony Caskey, Carrie Caskey
Susan Morris, representing Anthony and Carrie Caskey, addressed the Planning Board in regards to a Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval for 2-6 Hayward Street (Map 27, Lots 0465, 0466). Ms. Morris explained that Theodore and Karen Morris wished to sell half of the duplex and allow the Caskeys to live in the other half. Ms. Morris explained that the driveway on the right side of the building was built on the neighbor’s property, and that the neighbors agreed to swap that portion of the property for another area of the Morris’ property.
Mr. Puleo noted that Lot B was already nonconforming and had a nonconforming side lot line requirement which made the other lot conform. Mr. Taormina noted that the ZBA decision for the nonconforming lot was attached to the decision. Mr. Puleo explained that Lot A1 would be conveyed to the neighbors and in turn they would convey Lot B1 to the applicants.
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this point, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to approve the Form A Application, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (7-0).
Continuation of Public Hearing - Request to Amend Site Plan Review Decision - Stutz Volvo - 309 Highland Ave. (Map 8, Lot 139) - Beth Rennard
Beth Rennard requested, through correspondence, a continuation of the public hearing until May 17th 2007, stating that the parties would be meeting on May 1st 2007 for a settlement decision.
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Ms. Lombardini to continue the public hearing on May 17th 2007, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (6-0). Ms. Hanscom was not present for the motion.
Public Hearing - Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan - Leggs Hill Road (Map 30, Lot 83) - Atty. George Atkins, Chris Novak
Mr. Atkins, representing the North Shore YMCA, addressed the Planning Board in regards to an Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan for Leggs Hill Road (Map 30, Lot 83). He noted that the subdivision plan had been approved in July 2006. Mr. Atkins stated that the applicant was requesting approval to remove a subdivision road as well as five house lots, explaining that the reason was because the cost of construction had increased dramatically since the plan was originally developed and approved. He also noted that the price of lots had leveled off and, in some cases, had dropped. He stated that the developers were facing soft costs related to the overseeing of the construction of a roadway, adding that they were required, because of a Fire Department request, to cut a road up to the building as a second access.
Mr. Atkins explained that this new access drive resulted in the construction of two retaining walls, with additional cost estimated at $200,000. Mr. Atkins stated that in their final analysis the developers estimated that, at best, they would make back the cost of construction for the project.
Mr. Atkins stated that the developers had created 6 new lots on Leggs Hill Road. He stated that the YMCA had committed to a number of offsite improvements, including turning lanes onto Loring Ave. and the widening of Leggs Hill Road across the bridge. He added that the Salem Fire Department had requested that funds be put aside for the installation of an opticom system on Leggs Hill Road. Mr. Atkins explained that the applicant intended to keep these funds in escrow for a year to see if the opticom system would be necessary, and if it wasn’t the funds would be used for the installation of sidewalks and curbing along Leggs Hill Road. Mr. Atkins added that the Town of Marblehead had requested improvements to the intersections at the entranceway of Leggs Hill Road and also on Tedesco Street. Mr. Atkins estimated that
all of these improvements would be a $500,000 commitment by YMCA.
Mr. Atkins stated that when the applicants decided to remove the subdivision roadway, the YMCA decided to stay committed to the offsite improvements. He explained that the City Planner had determined that the best enforcement mechanism for the city would be to modify the subdivision and keep all offsite improvements in place, which the applicant agreed to.
Mr. Atkins stated that the developers intended to install landscaping in the area where the house lots had been located to provide a screening between the parking lot and the residential neighborhood across the pond. He stated that the applicant had committed, by way of an order of conditions from the Conservation Commission, to a conservation restriction in the area between the pond and the parking lot, adding that the landscaping would create a better aesthetic view from across the pond.
Mr. Atkins noted that a letter from the Salem Fire Department to the City Clerk stated that they could not approve the plan. Mr. Atkins explained the issues raised in the letter. First, the new lots extend over the access road. Mr. Atkins explained that this was an easement, not an encroachment, across the lots. The second issue was that the Fire Department felt the roadway access around the building was less than the requested width, which was 18 feet. Mr. Atkins stated that they must have read the plan, because the roadway was in fact 18 feet all the way around. Thirdly, Mr. Atkins stated that the letter referenced the box culvert on Leggs Hill Road. He noted that there had been an instruction from the Fire Chief to the Fire Department not to use their equipment across the bridge. Mr. Atkins noted that North Shore YMCA
does not own the bridge.
Mr. Puleo asked why the developers had decided to take out the emergency fire gate entrance from the original plan. Chris Novak, engineer from VHB, stated that the developers were now proposing to have a loading area in the back of the building, thus eliminating the gate to allow access to the roadway. He added that there would be no parking on the roadway. Mr. Kavanagh noted that the Police Department would be able to patrol behind the building if the fire gate was eliminated.
Mr. Moustakis stated that he was concerned with the loss of the house lots, citing that the city would lose the tax revenues from the absent lots. He suggested that a condition be made that if in the future the lots are used, they must be house lots and not a parking lot. Mr. Atkins stated that he would agree to that condition.
Mr. Collins stated he felt it would make sense to have the road behind the YMCA be one-way, citing that it would eliminate the need for an emergency gate.
Mr. Puleo asked if they were proposing any private lighting on the roadway. Mr. Atkins stated that they weren’t, adding that there would be lighting in the parking lot.
Mr. Puleo asked if the developers had had any discussion with the Fire Department addressing the comments in their letter. Mr. Atkins stated he felt the developers did not need any further approval from the Fire Department, adding that they had received the letter that day and had not spoken with the Fire Department yet.
Mr. Moustakis suggested that the developers meet with the Fire Department. Mr. Novak stated that they presented a plan revised on March 1st 2007 to the Fire Department, and they had not received any comment back yet. Mr. Atkins noted that Bill Jennings had met with the Fire Chief since then. Mr. Puleo noted that the Chief’s letter instructing the Fire Department not to use the box culvert bridge was dated March 27th 2007.
At this point the hearing was opened to public comment.
Ward 7 City Councilor Joseph A. O’Keefe, Sr. noted that the loss of the 4 house lots was a significant loss for the city of Salem in terms of tax revenue. Councilor O’Keefe asked that the Planning Board not approve the subdivision plan.
Ward 3 City Councilor Jean Pelletier suggested that the 4 house lots be added back into the plan before the subdivision plan be approved by the Planning Board. He added he felt that an 18 foot road was not wide enough for a fire vehicle and the necessary equipment.
Councilor At Large Joan B. Lovely requested that the Planning Board deny the subdivision amendment unless the applicant agrees to original plan for 10 house lots.
Councilor At Large Arthur C. Sargent stated the 4 house lots in question would act as an important buffer for the closest residential abutters to the site, and asked that the Planning Board deny the amended subdivision plan unless the house lots are added in again.
Ward 2 City Councilor Michael Sosnowski concurred with the comments of the city council members, adding that, at side from the loss of the house lots, he supported the plan.
Michael Bouchard of 67 Leggs Hill Road stated his opinion that the developers were annulling 5 lots, not 4.
Robert Bouchard of 23 Linden Ave. stated his opinion that the plan for the parking lot had been rearranged from the previous plan. He also asked if the original elevation had been changed.
Councilor O’Keefe stated that the Knox Box was for exclusive Fire Department use, and that the Police Department would not have access to the keys for the emergency gate. He asked if the YMCA would be part of Marblehead or Salem. Mr. Atkins stated that it would be in Salem.
Mr. Atkins stated that there was no law requiring the owner of a subdivision to build the subdivision. He added that the developers could present an Approval Not Required Plan for any number of lots and the YMCA lot, then record it and build without additional conditions and requirements. He noted that the reason the developers were requesting an Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan was to continue the YMCA’s commitments to the offsite improvements.
Councilor Sosnowski asked if the site plan approval had been approved last year with the condition that ten houses would be built. Mr. Atkins cited that it was a subdivision plan not a site plan approval, adding that the developer requested no waivers for the subdivision road off the cul-de-sac. He affirmed that they had decided not to build 4 of the houses. Councilor Pelletier suggested that the Planning Board hire an attorney to review the subdivision. Ms. Hanscom suggested that the city attorney address these questions. Mr. Puleo noted that the issues with the Fire Department need to be cleared up, noting that the City Planner had given her opinion on the matter.
Ms. Sullivan noted that on certain projects there has been arguments made by City Council that too many houses were being built, asking why their opinions were reversed on this project. She also noted that she believed that the Planning Board could not compel anyone to build houses.
Mr. Kavanagh stated that the applicant has the right to ask for modifications with a Form A proposal, adding that he had no objection to asking Ms. Rennard’s advice on the issue.
Mr. Collins asked if the developers could install a roadway stretching from the top of the property to Leggs Hill Road, citing that it would eliminate about 80 feet of roadway. Mr. Novak stated that the elevation is too high.
Ms. Lombardini asked if it would be possible to sell the lots to individual buyers. Mr. Atkins stated that the issue was not the cost of the homes but the cost of the roadway. Ms. Lombardini stated she felt that the loss of potential tax revenue from the houses was substantial.
Councilor Lovely stated she felt it was a threat from the developers to suggest taking away all the house lots if told to return the 4 lots in question.
Ms. Sullivan suggested that a middle ground be reached between the city and the applicant in a condition that the plans be revisited when the market picks up.
Ms. Hanscom asked what the developers planned to do with the land between the lots and the roadway. Mr. Novak stated that it would be a vegetated landscape berm.
Robert Bouchard stated that the elevation between the parking lot and the pond is a high blasted ledge. Mr. Novak stated that the elevation of the parking lot hasn’t changed. Mr. Novak stated that the site is under construction and that the developers could not hydro seed unless they are able to place the crushed material, which has been delayed because they were only allowed to blast once a day. He added that by removing the house, they were able to include some low impact design measures, which included a 100 foot vegetation buffer and a storm drain. He also noted that they were building within city regulation.
Mr. Puleo asked if the elevation of the roadway had been changed since the original plan. Mr. Novak stated that the elevation was not modified. Mr. Puleo asked if the driveway had been modified. Mr. Novak stated that it had been modified to eliminate the large retaining wall they originally had planned to build in that area.
Mr. Atkins stated that the developers had received a communication from the Chairman of the Conservation Commission in regards to the concerns raised by neighbors about material on the site, adding that tests had been done revealing that there was no hazardous waste on the site.
Mr. Moustakis asked if there was a clerk of the works for this project. Mr. Novak stated that they had a construction manager from the YMCA, but that he was not from the city.
Councilor Pelletier suggested that the YMCA should sell the lots to another developer to be used as house lots.
Michael Bouchard asked if the neighboring abutters were invited to the Conservation Commission meeting. Mr. Atkins stated that it was not a public meeting.
There being no further questions or comments regarding the matter at this time, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to continue the public hearing on May 17th 2007, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0).
New/Old Business
Mr. Kavanagh suggested that the Planning Board send a letter to Mr. Merhalski thanking him for his service to the Planning Board.
Ms. Shea brought the Mylar plan for the Planning Board to sign.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Ms. Lombardini to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Kavanagh, and approved (7-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Ian Fullerton, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| 
