Salem Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
June 21, 2007
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, June 21, 2007, in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts at 7:00 p.m.
Members present were: Chairman Chuck Puleo, Vice Chair Walter Power, John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Pam Lombardini and Christine Sullivan. Also present were Frank Taormina, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk.
Members Absent: Nadine Hanscom and Tim Ready.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes for the June 7, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed.
Walter Power suggested a correction on page 2, changing President Emeritus to Chairman Emeritus.
Walter Power suggested a correction on page 2, top paragraph, “the” taken out. On page 3, last sentence top paragraph change “green” to “red”. Also, on page 5, “roof” changed to “roof deck”, and page 6, second paragraph, change “was” to “has”.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Mr. Power to accept the minutes as presented, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0).
Continuation of Public Hearing- Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan- Leggs Hill YMCA, Leggs Hill Road (map 30, Lot 0083)- Attorney George Atkins, Chris Nowak, PE- Continued till July19 2007
Chairman Puleo read a letter submitted by Attorney George Atkins requesting that the Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan- Leggs Hill YMCA, Leggs Hill Road public hearing be continued until July 19th.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the public hearing to July 19, 2007 seconded by John Moustakis, and approved (7-0).
Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 06, Lots 6,7,8)- Attorney Jack Keilty- Continued till July 19 2007
Chairman Puleo read a letter from Attorney Jack Keilty requesting that the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue, be continued to July 19th because the peer review has not yet been completed.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to continue the public hearing on July 19, 2007, seconded by
Walter Power and approved (7-0).
Public Hearing- Site Plan review Special Permit & Drive Through Facilities Special Permit- Danvers Bank, 3-5 Traders Way (Map 08, Lot 0126)- Attorney George Atkins
Christine Sullivan was going to excuse herself from this hearing due to possible connection with person at bank. Kevin Bottomly, President of Danvers Bank, is also a member of the corporation for whom she works (The Enterprise Center at SSC). She wanted disclosure and Attorney George Atkins said that the disclosure did satisfy the statutory requirements. The proponent had no objection to her remaining on the board for the public hearing. She remained at the hearing/meeting.
Attorney George Atkins, representing Danvers Bank, 59 Federal St., introduced Dave Tinaglia, Danvers Bank Facility Manager, and Rick Salvo, the Project Engineer, Central St., Saugus. Attorney Atkins said that the Special Permit is for a bank drive-thru. He explained that the project is for Danvers Savings Bank, about 3-4,000 sq ft where Blockbuster Video (South side of building, Payless Shoe is on North side of building) currently is. There would be no access to Highland Ave. as all exits/access would be within Traders Way.
There really are no changes to the building except for the canopy where the drive thru would be. He mentions the length of the building, 300 ft around, for cuing purposes at the drive thru and that is substantial as there will be two lanes for drive thru- one for the actual drive thru, and one for passing thru. The current entries on the northern and southern side remain the same. Attorney Atkins stated that they have submitted a memo from VanEss concerning traffic to be generated by the bank. There should be less traffic on nights and weekends compared to the video store. The bank will be open normal banking hours Mon-Wed 9-4, Thu & Fri 9-6, Sat 9-noon. Impact on Highland Ave should be minimal and he hopes that the city will welcome this second site for Danvers Bank. The current first site is at Crosby
marketplace on Canal Street. He added in that the plans include elevation plans, shows the addition of the canopy, ATM and drive thru area. There is no change in plowing and lighting. The parking and entryway program for snow removal will remain the same.
Attorney Atkins explained that there will be 3 signage locations: one facing Highland Avenue (west side), one over the entry way facing Traders Way, and one on the canopy (south side). These will need to meet sign requirements. Traders Way signage is based on the frontage that the building has. Christine Sullivan brought up the previous issue of Beverly National Bank (who had to redo their sign because they didn’t do what was shown on their plans) and asked what the sign requirement is. Does Danvers Bank need to show their signs on their plans? Frank Taormina said that the signage can be shown on the site plans however there is a sign application process outside of the planning board where sign applications are reviewed and approved.
Rick Salvo, Project Engineer, addressed a question from Chairman Puleo regarding traffic flow into the parking lot and one-way entries by showing on the map where they will be adding “do not enter” signs. The site will have entrance and exit signs, and drive-thru signs as well so that patrons will clearly see where the drive-thru and parking areas area.
Mr. Power questioned the traffic and cues for the drive thru. If the cue were long enough to go around the North side, would there be enough room for cars to park and get in and out? Mr. Salvo said yes there would be and to fill the cue that far, it would have to be about 17 cars in line, which is a rare circumstance. Mr. Power also inquired about plowing and Mr. Salvo said that it’s the landlord’s responsibility and that there are no changes in plowing.
Chairman Puleo noticed that they’re changing some of the parking spaces to diagonal parking and is there an adequate number of parking spaces? Will the ATM be lit at night? Attorney Atkins said yes to both questions. Chairman Puleo also noticed that most of the plantings are gone from the front of the building- is there a landscaping plan? Attorney Atkins replied that he is not sure if there is a landscaping plan from years ago and that he believes it’s the landlord’s responsibility.
Mr. Moustakis asked, in regards to cross access, have the requirements of the ordinance been met. Attorney Atkins said that there is no cross access to the business next door (McDonalds). There is no shared or joint access. All sites on Traders Way have their own operational system, and he believes that is what is in the ordinance.
Chairman Puleo commented that the dumpster and the location of dumpster looks bad, and passed some photos around that he took when he was there and maybe it could be added in as a condition with the landlord. Mr. Moustakis feels that the proprietor should be in touch with the landlord, Attorney Atkins is not sure they would have leverage. Mr. Moustakis suggested that they could say the Planning Board brought it up and that they were concerned. Attorney Atkins said instead of making it a condition they could advocate the two issues and bring them up with the landlord- the shrubbery and the dumpster. Mr. Collins doesn’t think it should be a condition with Danvers Bank since it’s not their responsibility. Mr. Kavanaugh thinks that maybe they could just put some pressure on the landlord. It
is the same landlord who owns Shaws and he is good at cooperating and responding to maintenance inquiries.
Chairman Puleo asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak.
John Pelletier, Councilor Ward 3, asked where the deliveries are to existing stores, such as Payless Shoes. He is concerned with delivery trucks, cuing, and space for cars to get in and out. Attorney Atkins said its 57 ft (on the side) from curb to building, which should be enough space. He also explained that part of the submission of the plan included an estimation of cars for the drive thru. Tim Kavanaugh asked what the minimum number of spaces for cuing is. Attorney Atkins said it’s 4. Mr. Moustakis thought it may be a good idea for a site visit for the Planning Board, others aren’t sure if that’s necessary. Mr. Kavanaugh said that it appears that deliveries wouldn’t have any effect on the bank maintaining the minimum amount of cue spaces.
Councilor Pelletier is concerned about the space between parked cars and cars getting in and out and asked that ‘for the average space, is there room for cars to get by if there is a delivery truck there?’ Mr. Salvo pointed out on the map that for the current building, the loading area was made separate from the parking area and that it doesn’t appear that a tractor trailer could even get in there and make deliveries. Chairman Puleo questioned whether the landlord should set a schedule for delivery times so that there wouldn’t be a problem. Attorney Atkins stated that Payless and the other current stores have deliveries now without any problems and added that the cue at the bank wouldn’t get around the corner that far to cause problems.
Mr. Power suggested that deliveries parallel park, leaving more room for cars to get by. Chairman Puleo believes that this is general practice already. He also reiterated that Attorney Atkins will address two issues with the landlord- the shrubbery/landscaping and the dumpster. Mr. Collins suggested that the Planning Board could bring up (with the landlord) the fact that the landlord hasn’t met some conditions. Ms. Sullivan recommended that a copy of the site plan conditions be given to Attorney Atkins for use during their negotiation, then if there are no dumpster or landscape plans, then they should include those. Mr. Moustakis added that it might be that when the bank goes in, those issues may be addressed for aesthetic purposes and may resolve then.
Chairman Puleo asked if there were any more comments or questions from the public.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Mr Collins made a motion to continue the public hearing, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0).
Mr. Collins asked if there was anything that needed to be addressed, other than what was discussed tonight, and do they need to continue the discussion on the Danvers Bank. Since some members may not be available on July 5, 2007, discussion about changing the meeting to the following week went on.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Mr. Lombardini made a motion to reschedule the next regular meeting from July 5th to July 12th, seconded by Mr. Moustakis and approved (7-0).
Pam Lombardini made a motion to continue the discussion on the Site Plan Review & Drive Through Facilities Special Permit- Danvers Bank, 3-5 Traders Way at the July 12th meeting, seconded by Ms. Sullivan and approved (7-0).
Old/New Business
Discuss and vote: Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to rezone parcels on Clark Avenue from Industrial to (R1) Single Family Residential including two parcels that were part of the proposed Chapel Hill Subdivision. The parcels are map 6, Parcels 4,6,8,9,10,15,17 and 19.
Chairman Puleo passed out copies of a more extensive map than was seen at the joint public hearing, which he requested prior to the meeting.
Mr. Moustakis, in response to claims at the public hearing on June 18th, said that the Engineer and Land Surveyor for the developer also made an error years ago, citing the wrong zoning district for the mentioned parcels (Single Family Residential when it was actually Industrial land).
Since Ms. Sullivan was unable to attend the public hearing, Chairman Puleo briefly explained the two issues on the table and she inquired as to whether the Board could vote separately on the two issues. Chairman Puleo said no, it’s one vote, but there is an opportunity to vote on some and not others. They have three choices: make a recommendation to approve the rezoning of all parcels to R1; make a recommendation to approve the rezoning of some parcels to R1, or make a recommendation to deny the request to rezone any parcel.
Pam Lombardini suggested keeping things simple. Think about the zoning, not the cluster issue. We should rezone the house lots, but the other two, she thinks would be an appeal that they would win.
Chairman Puleo pointed out that on the map all the lots in question and referenced a triangular lot that abuts the parcel is owned by the City of Salem, which has a conservation restriction on it. He pointed out that the brown area is zoned Industrial.
Mr. Collins made a point of clarification- the petition is to rezone all the mentioned lots and do we agree with the zoning change in totality. Chairman Puleo reminded everyone that the board has three options.
Frank Taormina supplied the board members a letter from the City Council requesting the Planning Board to make a recommendation to the Council regarding the request to rezone the lots in question.
Mr. Power said that if the Board was to recommend the existing homes build on industrial zoned land be rezoned to R1 single family residential and not recommend the rezoning of the other two undeveloped parcels, then the developer will have a strong case against the city. The Planning Board should rezone all of the parcels. Mr. Moustakis agrees and adds that if they didn’t rezone the two vacant parcels, that the developer would appeal and that the Board would likely lose the appeal.
Chairman Puleo said that the plan shown by the developer looks pretty dense and that’s what the people were concerned with. If the cluster meets the requirements, he may go forward if rezoned.
Ms. Lombardini agreed with Gene in that the only issue right now is the rezoning issues. They can deal with the cluster and density issues when that comes up.
Mr. Kavanaugh re-emphasized that it’s the duty of the engineer and/or land surveyor to accurately plot information on the plans. Their stamp on the plans state that the information is accurate and it wasn’t. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that he believes that everyone was acting in good faith truly believing that the six (6) parcels were in fact zoned residential and that the existing homes currently build in an industrial zone should receive relief. His preference is to recommend that the existing homes be rezoned to (R1) single family residential and that parcels 8 & 9 also be rezoned to (R1) single family residential as well.
Ms. Sullivan differs. She thinks that they should rezone the six (6) occupied parcels and not the other two because it would be like a domino effect. Once those are rezoned, Lynn Sand and Stone (which owns the large abutting property) could sell part of their land to the developer, and so on and so forth.
Tim Kavanaugh made a motion for all eight (8) parcels be rezoned to (R1) single family residential, seconded by Gene Collins. Six (6) voted in favor (Power, Moustakis, Collins, Kavanaugh, Puleo, Lombardini) and one (1) opposed (Sullivan).
Mr. Power thanked the City Council members for being present at the Planning Board meeting so that they can hear the rational of why they strongly recommend that all eight (8) parcels be rezoned to (R1) single family residential.
Chairman Puleo asked if there was any other business.
Mr. Collins suggested they hold on to the memo from Lynn Duncan regarding the two item that were not heard tonight and continued to July 19th.
Frank Taormina stated that he will confirm that the rescheduling of the July 5th meeting to July 12th will not be a problem or conflict with other regularly scheduled meetings, and get back to the board members.
Tim Kavanaugh asked if Dave Mohler from Mass Highway brought any information back to Lynn Duncan regarding the boxed culvert. Frank stated that he would check with Lynn and supply they with those answers at the next meeting.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (7-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Stacey Dupuis, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| 
