Minutes of Joint Public Hearing with the City Council and Planning Board
July 1, 2009
A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held Wednesday, July 1, 2009 at 6:30 pm in the Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts to discuss proposed re-codification of the Salem Zoning Ordinances.
The proposed re-codification provides for the adoption of re-codified Sections 1 through 10; the repeal of certain ordinances not included therein; and providing when such code and this ordinance shall become effective. The purpose of the recodification is to reorganize the Zoning Ordinance. ~The proposed recodified sections contain “housekeeping” changes, rather than substantive changes.
The meeting was posted on June 26, 2009 and advertised in the Salem Evening News on June 17th and 24th, 2009 by the City Clerk.
City Council Members present: Paul Prevey, President, Mike Sosnowski, Jerry Ryan, Arthur Sargent III, Jean Pelletier, Robert McCarthy and Joseph O’Keefe, Sr. Absent: Steven Pinto, Joan B. Lovely, Matthew Veno and Thomas Furey.
Planning Board Members present: Chuck Polio, Chairman, Tim Ready, Pam Lombardini, Christine Sullivan, John Moustakis, Tim Kavanaugh and Gene Collins. Lynn Duncan, Executive Director, Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Nadine Hanscom and Dave Weiner.
Also present: City Solicitor Beth Rennard and Building Inspector Tom St. Pierre
City Council President Paul Prevey opened the meeting, read the meeting notice and acknowledged the City Councillors who were present. He introduced Chuck Puleo, Chairman of the Planning Board, and Planning Board members.
Lynn Duncan explained that the purpose for recodification was 'housekeeping', to make it easier to use. The intent was not to change zoning, but to make it more user friendly. The process started in November 2007 and they hired Attorney Mark Bobrowski to assist in the process. Two versions of the Zoning Ordinance Recodification are available, a clean copy and a copy with strike-throughs to show the changes. Some issues came up during the recodification process that will need to be addressed in the future, these were put in a "parking lot" and include: PUD, cluster, site plan review process, assisted living, entrance corridor, off-street parking. Another purpose for the recodification is to follow state governs and have consistency; they added uses or terminology that are now common (for
example, "bed and breakfast" was used instead of "tourist homes").
Lynn Duncan explained that with the proposed changes, the City would not need to change its ordinances every time state statutes changed. Councillor Sosnowski questioned whether the recodification document will contain verbiage such as "See ......" to direct the layman where to look for further information. He wants to make sure that when someone wants make changes or additions, for example, put in a pool, that when they look at the zoning recodification documents, they know where to find necessary information. He suggested putting Mass General Law numbers in the recodification document instead. However, Lynn Duncan said that the Mass General Law numbers change a lot, so that may not be helpful. Lynn Duncan mentioned that in the recodification document, 5.1 needs to be deleted, replaced with 7.3 and
renamed 5.1. She asked the City Councillors and Planning Board members to assist in moving this process along, and suggested that the public hearing be closed tonight.
Lynn introduced Attorney Mark Bobrowksi who went over some highlights of the strike through document:
Section 1- Changes are minor.
Section 2- Districts- shows boundaries, lines, etc.
Section 3- Establishes a use regulation table, there was no attempt to make changes of uses. Accessory uses on page 23- no changes.
Section 3.3- this section was rewritten to update based on case law. Attorney Bobrowski is willing to work with the ZBA if they have any questions. Also, for the first time, tear downs, nonconforming are included.
Section 4- Table of dimensional requirements are now included.
Section 5- "Fire Dept" will be changed to "Chief of Fire Dept", as well as in the rest of document.
Section 6 - no changes
Section 7- "Petition" will be changed to "application".
Section 8- A chart for dimensional use is included.
Section 9- Site plan review is section 9.5.12
Section 10 - This is the definition section.
In reference to section 10 ( rooming, boarding or lodging house) Councillor O'Keefe asked about the number of roomers. Christine Sullivan asked for clarification of section 3, ability for demolition.
Meeting Opened to the Public
John Carr, 7 River Street, followed up on Christine's question and asked about voluntary demolition. Attorney Bobrowski said with voluntary demolition, to rebuild, you could ask for a variance if the dimensions required it, but if you voluntarily demolish your house you have lost your rights.
Robert Levins was concerned with the phrase "preserve the cultural heritage". At the informational meeting held in Sept/Oct, Attorney Bobrowksi said that this is commonly used in a purpose section, but Mr. Levins hasn't found it in any other zoning documents. Also, Mr. Levins wondered if, for permitted uses in a residential conservation, should there be a provision for a license for piers as it's different in each city. Attorney Bobrowski commented that if the City Councillors want "preserve the cultural heritage" taken out, they can do that. As for a license for piers, he will need to look into that. Robert Levins said, in response to a question by Councillor Jean Pelletier, that about 10 years ago, when a pier was last rebuilt, they got a permit from the City and Chapter 91,
but they didn't have to go to the zoning board.
Councillor McCarthy thanked Attorney Bobrowski for all his hard work and says the tables and charts will be much easier to use. He wondered if this new document is adopted, what sort of advantage would it give applicants’ attorneys. Attorney Bobrowski mentioned that it does not necessarily offer advantages other than ease of use – it will have updated definitions and consistency. Councillor Sargent wondered if it would hurt if we were to keep the old purpose in section 1. Attorney Bobrowski said they could keep 1.1 to 1.3, but add “ the provisions of the Zoning Act, G.L. c.40A, as amended, Section 2A of 1975 Mass. Acts 808, and by Article 89 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts” at the end. Lynn Duncan explained that the
current purpose section relates to the “point” system, a system once used by other cities to regulate growth, but which the City of Salem had never used, and was not to the city’s benefit. They will take a look at and see what make sense for the purpose section.
Councillor Pelletier suggested they get amendments out on the floor so it can be moved to the Planning Board.
Lynn Duncan agreed that it’s great to get issues out tonight; it's still feasible to close the public hearing. The Planning Board could go over these and make a recommendation to the Council, the Council can make amendments during their first passage. Councillor Sosnowski asked about protocol as he wants to move this forward but wants to make sure amendments are made.
Councillor Pelletier moved to close the public hearing.
Teasie Riley Goggin asked where the Salem Mission falls under these codes and Lynn explained that since it’s a homeless shelter, organized as a nonprofit, and could possibly be characterized as exempt.
There was a brief discussion on protocol for this project.
A motion was made by Councillor Pelletier to close the public hearing, all in favor.
A motion was made by Councillor Pelletier to move this to the Planning Board for recommendation, all in favor.
A motion was made by Councillor O’Keefe to adjourn, all in favor.
Meeting ended at 8:30 pm
Respectfully Submitted,
Stacey Dupuis
Clerk
Approved by the Planning Board 9-17-09
| 
