okay well good evening so uh we're here tonight for it is 7 o'clock we're here for our public meeting of the town of Danver's planning board uh we're here at the TUMI room at Danver's Town Hall uh tonight is April the 8th 2025 and at 7
p.m my name is Lewis George i'm the chair um and with me tonight is Gene Hartnett our clerk um Michael Dulis a member of the board and Tim Spiddle um Jim Sears uh member of the board is will
not be present this evening so uh so we have a um pretty full agenda today so why don't we get get started here i'm sorry i I should say also that Josh Morris principal planner with the town is here providing support today so um so without further ado I want to get
started with our agenda today so um the first item is uh Tras Lane uh full release of covenant that's a request for a full release of a covenant established on August 28th 1972 which is associated with
the definitive subdivision plan entitled proposed access to Folly Hill Development Danvers Massachusetts and dated June 2nd 1972 and also known as Tras Lane Danvers Mass uh and Josh I I
believe that this is um the applicant has requested a continuence that's right they've as they've uh requested a continuence to um our next um meeting in April on April 22nd okay got it and it's just we're I I believe that they're working on some some engineering issues
or that sort of thing yep we're just waiting some uh we're waiting from a memo or correspondence from the development team uh just regarding an item just regarding like the the Tras Lane Road so okay very good so what do we So we need from us a motion to
continue the um the meeting on Tras Lane to our April 22nd that's correct okay i'd like to entertain a motion is that something Jean make a motion that we continue Tras Lane um to our next meeting April 22nd 2025 okay motion's
been made by Gan is there a second second second by Mike Doulis uh any discussion on the motion hearing none all in favor please say I i i any opposed none okay so that's been moved
to our uh April 22nd 2025 meeting okay so our next agenda item is 32 Maple Street aka 30-36 Maple Street uh it's a request by Robert G scorano trustee for endorsement of an approval not required
ANR plan for 3 32 Maple Street aka 30 to 36 Maple Street assessor's map 43 lot 353 as a perimeter plan showing the property lines of an existing lot the property is located in the Danvers Town
Core DTCC zoning district uh before the applicant begins before we begin on this I just wanted to make a note here um I am a member of the board of trustees of the Danvers Historical Society uh which actually is a director of butter to this
uh property from the back and so just out of an abundance of caution uh I'm not going to be participating in this um uh uh in this discussion or in any sort of vote today so I'm going to uh I'm going to step away and I'm going to pass the uh the chair to Jean Hartman to
serve as acting chair and uh Tim Spiddle to serve as acting clerk okay excuse me just give me a moment good evening chairman board members robert G scarano i'm the trustee of Jay
Gab realy trust have been the owner of 32 aka 3236 Maple Street for over 35 years um we have uh prepared an ANR plan not depicting a subdivision uh requesting an
endorsement uh as a perimeter plan um it is basically uh to preserve uh the existing zoning u my executive summary states the same and uh thank you for uh consideration in Law Smith
okay we'll go to the board with any questions tim yeah if helpful just to talk through I mean we don't see a before and after so what the proposals are for actually changing on the the image we're seeing here there are no proposed changes to any lot lines uh
there are no proposed changes uh to the existing plan that's been in existence uh um since it went on record at the registry of deeds um and really the only purpose here is to uh demark between existing property lines and for
protection uh pursuant to uh the general laws in Massachusetts right no other questions mike no questions thanks thank you and I don't have any questions um so do I
anyone want to make a motion actually this is not a public hearing but does anybody from the audience have any questions or comments seeing none uh does somebody want to make a motion to approve the ANR
for 32 Maple Street so moved second well I think Tim I think you have to make the mo you I make a mo motion that we approve the ANR for uh 32 Maple Street second okay um
all in favor okay and all in favor i I Well thank you very much for your consideration and uh I'll be in touch with Josh when do plan thank you so much good evening want to get You want to get Luke oh yeah
never come back [Music] i'm back okay thanks very much okay okay thank you and picking up on the next agenda item uh we have a uh public hearing uh uh for I believe this
is a continuation of a public hearing that we had previously begun at a prior meeting for 50 Independence Way uh it's a request for site plane review pursuant to section four of the zoning bylaw uh submitted by Chick-fil-A Care of Bowler Engineering for property in the
commercial 3C3 zoning district the applicant proposes a standalone restaurant with a drive-thru and associated site modifications map 63 lot 5 unit one okay so if the applicant is here you can please identify yourself
for the record and one just one uh note as well if you do wish I know we we have something on the screen we do have actually have a portable microphone if you wish to use as well or you can just you can speak from the podium whichever your preference i should be able to present from here okay um if you could just speak up for
the Good evening everyone i never have to move the mic up but good evening everyone uh my name is Joey Fonaka with Bowler uh and here just to just to recap some of the changes uh that we've made since our first hearing here um so I'm just going to kind of just walk through a couple of the major um comments that
we that were received i think the biggest if you could just also just very for those who might not have um uh who who might not have you know attended the prior meeting if you could just give a just a very brief overview in terms of the of the proposal oh sure uh so this
site is the current friendly toast uh location um so the proposal for the Chick-fil-As to uh to remove or demo the existing friendly toast buildings shown here on the screen green kind of that turquoise color um located sort of on the west side of that
Independence access road there um so the the proposal is to demo the the existing building uh and then propose a a new approximately 5100 square ft Chick-fil-A restaurant with a drive-thru um the next slide Josh will show kind of the
proposed conditions uh so as you can see on this slide just briefly in red is is the outline of the existing uh Friendly Toast building so the the the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant is generally in the same location there um and a lot of the parking that was along the perimeter
of the site uh will now be uh more of a drive-through use uh here there's a three-lane entrance uh that merges down to a a two-lane uh at the pickup window and then there's a bypass lane on the outside of it um throughout the As you
can see here there is a a vast amount of landscaping that's being proposed here um there is a a pretty substantial reduction uh in imperous coverage with this uh with this site it's about 9,000 square ft of imperous coverage um currently it's just kind of a large
parking lot um throughout here so we're trying to um just just propose some additional greenery here um and certainly some buffering and um and propose some interior planting uh within those parking areas um but it's it's a it's it's a you know
it's basically a a a modification to the existing site location the building's kind of in a sim similar spot there and then north of the building is where we're proposing a trash enclosure uh location here um so there will be a you know reduction parking here um but we've
been you know coordinating that with staff as well as our our client and and certainly the property owners uh for the mall here um and feel that the the parking values and the parking totals that we have here um um you know we're we're in agreement with with the the total parking that's here that we've
arrived at um for this build is is ample for both Chick-fil-A as well as the um the adjoining uses here um utilities uh are going to be servicing the building similar to what's what's there today we're basically just going to be extending some of those utilities water sewer um to the building uh there'll be
a new electric new gas run to the building um and then there'll be some drainage improvements as well um a lot of the comments uh pertaining to drainage we've been working through with engineering and DPW uh and that's a lot of the comments that we've addressed uh since and and I think we've we've um
have some communication from DPW engineering that they're comfortable with where we're at with the plans now and there'll be some additional you know coordination items that we'll have as we uh assuming we we if we receive approval and we move on to a building permit phase that will um continue to
coordinate with DPW on that um that's just kind of a kind of a broad overview of it um as I mentioned we we have been coordinating with DPW engineering i think we're we've addressed the majority of their comments um and the few that are left will just be handled during uh
a construction um building permit phase uh there were a couple of comments that came out um under on the first uh hearing uh just pertaining to some of the the landscaping confirmed with our landscape uh team that the plants that we were proposing I think there's a table on this on the sheet as well they
are drought tolerant plants um to hear I know that that question came up at the last hearing um the paving that was that was performed offsite there's been a lot of uh communication back forth with our team with Josh i know there's a condition uh in the um the draft
decision that we had received and we were you know we reviewed that we're um okay with the language that is uh that is in that is on that condition um let's see and I think that was really it for
some of the comments that we had i think a lot of it like I said a lot of it was just kind of some final cleanup and coordination items with DPW Engineering um Josh had passed along the um the draft decision we reviewed it you know we're in agreement with the conditions that were listed there um here happy to
answer any additional questions if um there are any on this application okay sounds good and I'll I'll turn it over to the board in a moment for questions but just an initial what is the um what's the timeline in terms of construction and occupancy and such do you do you know in terms of when that So
we we don't have if I had my Chick-fil-A hat on I would say immediately um but it but I know that there are some lease um negotiations that are that are occurring here so we do have to wait for that to to to be handled but I it will be um I
believe it's going to be a a 26 uh construction okay okay okay i'll turn it over to um I'll turn it over to the board for any questions uh by members of the board uh because this is a public hearing we'll also entertain questions by members of the public as well but why don't we
start with the board first um Jean any questions for the applicant no I don't have any other further questions thanks okay um Mike any questions no further questions thanks okay uh Tim questions for the applicant
i'm just reading the condition you were talking about because I think one of our primary concerns was the maintenance of the roads in the development area the only documents I'm seeing here a letter from an asphalt company saying it's fine and then uh yeah for not to cut you off
Tim just forformational um which might not have been um corresponded well to the board um so between you can explain what what happened what what transpired what consultations were yep so between um our previous meeting on this and
tonight um I did reach out to Simon regarding um their condition associated with um like repaving and uh maintenance of the roads in or within the Liberty Tree Mall and
um the uh the north and all let me let me show you something real quick let me just one second so I reached out to Simon just for kind of a status of where we are in terms of
their maintenance and so on this I don't know if you could see it but um the colored area on the map like area A and C was was work that Simon had done in the fall of 2024 and so
um Josh is that on Commonwealth which is the same street as the uh um as the Logan Express yes okay but I just giving I was just giving context and so um in correspondence with Simon over the past week or so they have
um writen emails to town staff that I don't know if you could see my cursor but the north and south lanes of the the entrance and exit into the mall from Endicott Street that they will be repaving in um in May in May of in the
over the next month or so of 2025 i didn't see that in our materials that's it did I miss something no okay it was I I did okay good to know yes um Okay i think uh that's just to make a sort of meta comment because I think
that's outside of what's the responsibility of the applicant i think the plan and everything we've seen updated has been good i have no other questions but I think there's a nagging issue here that it's a bit of a whack-a-mole where oh they'll fix the thing we asked because we can deal with the thing right in front of us but like
my kids love Sky Zone and that parking lot is like a war zone um and so I just think that you know this is clearly not someone who's really motivated to upkeep make our town nice things in our town nice it's a little frustrating um this
is how we have to do it so just while we're on that subject Tim so the the exit and entrance main entrance main entrance exit from Enticott should be redone in like I said by the end of May of 2025 but if you could see my cursor
the kind of section of Independence Way between the two areas that will eventually you know very soon there's this sort of gap or area there is a condition in the decision that we'll be working with the applicant team over the next 18 months just evaluating and just
making sure that the condition of this section remains um positive and if not that we would um work with them and Simon to to also do that section if if needed so yeah I'm happy to see the condition about reassessing that i'm actually now that
you've mentioned it again the So it's in writing that they would repave a section of the road but it's not actually in the decision as a condition which um which project what are are you talking about this one this no the condition here says
that they will work on the section of Independence Road from Commonwealth to the intersection the T intersection of Independence Way right they will reassess so that so that they will be repaving a different section Simon will be in associated with the
Logan Express i'm maybe not articulate or communicating it well simon and associated with the Logan Express oh the Commonwealth Abstretch they already So but isn't it also the Independence Way so the center isn't that being repaved
as well um we're going to we're going to work with Simon to to like find do like the line of demarcation but um I guess I was just giving context Tim so this the one the colored thing on the map was associated with the Logan Express decision and then this section of
Independence Way is also going to be done by Simon because of Logan Express and the applicant in Chick-fil-A that's in front of us we will be evaluating this over the next 18 months this section so So now you've helped me understand that it's the independence way stretch that they say that is not
currently on the map area A B or C it's kind of like below it's kind of like below where that area C is is just Yeah so it's like that gap between what was done in the fall what's going to be done in a month and then there's that little there's that gap that we're hoping to work with them over the next
Yeah my point is just it's not captured anywhere in the decision no it it it is in that in that that re that reassessment one it's not yes it's not being paved but we have in the in the packet there was a third party saying
that the condition currently of that section is good so for when we're reset we said "All right it's good right now but in the next 18 months let's re-evaluate the situation and if and when it's not we will work with them to
if needed if that condition that you in the decision we will that will al that work will potentially also be done." So y I also feel like you shouldn't have to describe this for us like is anyone here from Simon Properties no or or no of
course not it's fine okay no other questions i Yeah got it thank you um back to paving uh just for the applicant does um do you have anything further to add about the paving because I know that the that there's a memo here from I
think dated March uh 28th from Asphalt Services Inc that talks about the um in essence talks about per your request we've assessed the drive lane in question between Commonwealth A and the access road of Independence Way the road between mainly Tubs parking field and
Firestone parking field the condition of the asphalt is good and there are no hazards typical ongoing maintenance is required as would normally be required for any typical asphalt surface um signed by uh John Baldacero the president of the of asphalt services so
um I think That's so that says as of this moment the that the area is okay but I think the concern was and I know I think the staff expressed that this is a um that's a snapshot in time this is not going to necessarily be up and running for a while so I think that was the
concern about having a reassessment in 18 months within 18 months to ensure that everything is a-okay on the paving uh because that's just been a continual issue and I'm looking at you I think I raised a question about paving at our last meeting too because we're also looking at demolition taking place
there's a lot of there's going to be a lot going on there so um do you have anything further to add in terms of the the applicant with respect to paving no other than that you know we're agreeing with with that condition number three on there to to reassess that okay um um
that that decision uh was reviewed you know by Chick-fil-A by our team uh and we agreed that uh you know we'd agree with that condition okay um just a couple of questions that I have with respect to this um uh you know to the application i I think it was something
um uh you know and I I know the last time that we were here the reason that we ended up you know continuing it because I think there was still some additional work that had to be done with respect to engineering um and sort of comments from engineering and I know
there's a um and we and we just you know I think you alluded to we do have an engineering memo uh dated April 7th and so um any things that um you're willing you know there's you know no issues in
terms of your your your uh your committing to comply with any of the terms and conditions in the engineering memo no because I mean a lot of that is just kind of just general I I'd say construction related activities okay that we that we would be doing we would be reviewing during a building permit
phase phase um here there are some items like a hydrogen flow test that we'll need to perform they're also requesting a um kind of a a CCTV inspection of that large drain line that's bicting the site
you know we'll have that performed and we'll share that information um and we'll certainly evaluate if there are any issues with that existing service but other than that the the majority of is just items that um the that those detail will just get ironed out as we proceed with construction so I guess so
you you're willing to though um satisfy all the comments in there in the memo yes um one question I did have and this this this is something I raised at the um at the last meeting and it's just a concern I have just because of the in terms of sort of pedestrian access and I
I raised that in terms of just concerns in terms of you know crosswalk and and really pedestrian safety i mean more of a concern too of like if you're someone's you know someone's getting their their tires done at Firestone and is wants to walk over for a sandwich or
someone who might be an employee of of one of the of one of the surrounding stores um what's any any further steps in terms of with respect to pedestrian safety or crosswalks or any of that sort of thing yeah so we we do have a couple of crosswalks we're showing that are
directly associated with our building um and just getting customers and employees or team members from the building to say the trash enclosure um you know other than that the existing mall there's just no pedestrian connectivity
throughout it's an older mall um so parking was a big concern here just just due to um you know different stakeholders throughout this mall um we were squeezing in as much parking as we can to fit you know the Chick-fil-A build here looking at it from a
pedestrian standpoint if we're providing uh additional crosswalks throughout from Firestone sorry to uh the Chick-fil-A building we'd be looking at removing a pretty substantial amount of parking to make that happen just to provide I guess a safe access through there not just
striping um so you're sort of parade through there um in our opinion I think we're we're trying to just keep the the condition that's there as kind of your your older you know open mall kind of setting here um you know I'm not sure if there are any future plans for the mall
to provide it but if there are um you know I'm sure Chick-fil-A would be involved in that and they would also you know review any any connections got it from that okay josh any any question any comments from staff in
terms of that in terms of the you know sort of crosswalk issues i mean that wasn't something flagged in engineering was it no I mean we had um we have met several times with the development team that was an item that came up um you
know we were we don't necessarily want to um just add cross I mean essentially it's sort of just like adding crosswalks potentially is like a potential um you know remedy here but I think you
understand you also don't want to create an attractive nuisance i guess and that we just didn't want to create we just didn't want to add crosswalks and not random places but just kind of creating conflict points necessarily that we didn't want we want to create a problem if there wasn't one
right create a new problem a new issue a new problem can you explain conflict point or just like you know putting crosswalks in places that maybe is not an appropriate location just so we could say that we're trying to like increase you know the pedestrian activity or like
you uh we talked with the development team about potential places to put crosswalks and why it wouldn't make sense in terms of you know just in you know obviously pedestrian safety or safety being you know a number one concern and I guess from a staff
perspective there weren't a lot of places that were obvious where you would add a that there's a crosswalk there where a location where crosswalk is missing that should be added okay so um
I definitely agree that it's that you know it is important for pedestrian activity and there will be folks um from the mall probably very likely like employees and some of the other uh
you know businesses at the mall or you know the out buildings at the mall like that Michael's kind of set of buildings that you know employees from those businesses will likely walk here for lunch um there just wasn't a lot
of great locations to to add additional crosswalks so I think where where I sat um you know this what's being proposed is at this time sat satisfactory okay one could you show me though the at
least so at least going from the sort of the external pedestrian access and cross could you show me again sort of the c within at least within the the the scope of the site with respect to um employees going into the into the store crossing over the drive you know the drive-thru
that sort of thing sure so this plan um might highlight which one do you think better probably that rendering i can I can describe it this one oh yeah um so north of the building there's a crosswalk and it and while it isn't a straight sort of north south crosswalk there it's just how that landscape Ben
Island um landed with respect to some of the doors along that face of the building um that that provides access to a to a new sidewalk directly across the drive aisle and then provides uh a crosswalk over to the trash enclosure that's obviously a dual purpose if there
are if there are customers that are parking up in that sort of section of parking they can certainly use that to to you know cross a drive aisle there and enter the sidewalk and then to the main door um so that is that is one area that um you know we've added a a crosswalk there again it's for for team
members as well as as customers um but that's really the only sort of location to have a pedestrian connection there okay um what about the area where the where the drive-thru is i know that was raised at the last meeting in terms of a concern of even crossing even safety of
team members crossing the drive-thru sure so there there's um the parking that's alongside the drive-thru you can see those angled parks to the right of that kind of darker shaded area that's a that's a canopy um that Can you point it out i'm sorry to you want to do the canopy or the employee parking job so
the the canopy where the cursor is now um is that's a covered canopy to the right of that is where uh the parking is along that sort of landscaped um edge there so that would be strictly employee parking there um within or underneath the canopy there there is there will be
crosswalk um uh striping in there and that again will again serve as sort of two purposes one it's for the team members to access the drive aisles when they're hand delivering meals out there versus when it's just a strictly a pickup window um uh so that crosswalk
will be installed uh within within the drive-through lane and that'll also be accessed by employees to enter the building if needed or they can you know use the rear door um uh to access the building as well um but again that outside lane is is will be you know
considered a bypass lane um and then those parking spaces that are along there are strictly going to Okay okay got it all right thank you um any other questions for members of the of the board no okay uh this is a public
hearing so if any members of the public have any questions or comments just please go to the microphone and uh uh make sure to address any questions through the chair and please identify yourself so Mr bradre Bill Brad precinct one i listen to the
discussion about the traffic and safety i'm thinking about the age of them all the fact that a lot of the present day drivers drive a little differently than when I was younger and I think this would be a good
time to do a uh perhaps a more thorough or a better uh review of the safety factors whether flashing lights mhm anything that's [Music] available to protect the public this
business would have let should as I say draw more uh traffic i'd be I would be very concerned i don't think they have a concern they're going to draw the business mhm i'd be more concerned about the uh the traffic flow and the pedestrians
both in the mall mhm those that uh are walking around can't afford to drive thank you thank you okay very good any any other um any other comments from members of
the public at all okay back to any other questions from the from the board okay so so hearing none coming back to this
uh coming back to the matter here so uh let's see okay i guess I could if there's nothing further we can uh entertain a you'd like to entertain a motion to uh to close the public hearing
make a motion to close the public hearing for 50 Independence Way okay the motion's been made by Jane is there a second second second by Tim okay all those in uh any discussion hearing none all those in favor of the motion to close the public hearing please say I i
any opposed none okay so then back to the uh back to the uh the actual motion itself for the site plan review uh Jean can I ask you to uh move uh make a
motion and uh with the decision yep um so site plan review for 50 independent weight date of application January 17 2025 date of hearings February 25th 2025 march 11th 2025 march 25th 2025 april
8th 2025 date of decision April 8th 2025 the Danverse planning board finds the site plan submitted by Chick-fil-A for excuse me property at 50 Independence Way Assessor's Map 63 lot 5
unit 1 to be in substantial compliance with the criteria and regulations adopted by the town details of the plan review can be found on the following plans proposed site plan documents for Chick-fil-A proposed restaurant with drive-thru 50 Independence Way Town of
Danvers Ex Essex County Massachusetts prepared by Bowler Engineering dated January 15th 2025 revised to March 27th 2025 consisting of 23 sheets supporting materials include architectural drawings
prepare unknown dated May 7th 2024 traffic assessment memorandum prepared by Bowman dated January 24th 2025 the following submission requirements have been waved one section 4.3.1 title sheet
the existing dwellings and principal buildings land use of each lot and zoning district boundaries are not shown on the plan existing contours at one foot intervals are shown on the demolition plan C100 and the grading and drainage plan C300 two section 4.3.2
site analysis plan no no site analysis plan submitted existing contours at 1 ft intervals are shown on the demolition plan C100 and the grading and drainage plan C300 three section 4.3.3 dimensional regulations plan
dimensional regulations plan is entitled the site plan C200 four section 4.3.4 site construction plan site construction plan is entitled the site plan C200 existing and proposed contours and proposed drainage are shown on the grading and drainage plan C300 no table
indicating amount of earth material that are to be removed added or reused five section 4.3.6 utilities plan the utilities plan is in titled the grading and drainage plan c300 and the plumbing site plan PS100 no profile of
utilities shown on the plan six section 4.3.7 landscape plan the methods for prospecting the plant or should that say protecting the plant materials during construction is shown on the landscape notes and details
L101 the yard setbacks are shown on site plan C200 a table showing the percentage of existing and proposed imperous surface and percentage of landscaping is not shown on the plan seven section 4.3.8 off- streetet parking and loading plan the off- streetet parking and
loading plan is entitled the site plan C200 the construction details and type of material is shown on the site detail C400 to C43 conditions of approval the project is subject to the following conditions one prior to issuance of a
building permit this site plan decision shall be recorded at the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds two prior to certificate of occupancy the property owner and applicant will coordinate with Simon Property Group to replace line striping and install a new stop sign and
a new no U-turn sign at the northbound approach at the internal T intersection of Independence Way three the property owner and the applicant will work with Simon Property Group to reassess the condition of the section of Independence Way Roadway from Commonwealth Avenue
intersection to the internal T intersection of Independence Way 18 months from the date of filing this decision if a third-party paving company consultant determines that roadway repairs and or repaving is necessary this roadway work will be completely
completed by the property owner and or the applica applicant within a reasonable time frame in cons consultation with town staff four the applicant will satisfy all the comments in the Danver's engineering division
memorandum dated April 7th 2025 five if they if there are any changes to the approved plans the use or the conditions on premises planning staff will review if deemed a major change by staff the applicant will have to apply for a new application for site plan
review this project is subject to the attached list of general conditions any approval of this site plan review shall lapse within 3 years from the grant thereof if construction has not begun by such date okay motion has been made uh is there a second second second by Tim
okay so any um any discussion on the motion okay hearing none all in favor please say I i i any opposed none okay how plan's been approved good luck thank you very much everyone appreciate thank you
okay so our fourth uh agenda item is um our public hearings uh this is for 61 High Street it's a request for special permits waiverss and site plan review submitted by Richard and Stacy Bachelli trustees and a point design Inc for
property at 61 High Street map 51 lot 303 pursuant to section 18.5D.5 a parking reduction methods on street parking offset section 18.13 design special permits build to
zone facade buildout street facing wall offset depth street facing transparency ground floor and section four site plan review of the zoning bylaw request of waiverss pursuant to section 18.5D.5 CV tandem
parking section 18.6 D2D building materials 18.6 6E building setback and street enclosure figure 18 of the zoning bylaw and request of waiver from table 7.2
C.3C forcourt standards of the zoning regulations of the planning board said property is in the high street mixeduse corridor HSMU zoning district the applicant is proposing a redevelopment which would include firstf flooror commercial space and eight residential
units on the upper floors with associated site modifications okay and um before the applicant begins just so the I know it's been staff made the applicant aware that we are uh we are shot short one member today so
but I'm figuring this out okay give me a moment very good we have our we are getting all set up with the new technology and how's that i I can hear you can hear you fine so attorney McCann you can introduce yourself and begin
josh is gone thank you very much my name is Nancy McCay and I'm here on behalf of the applicant Richard and Stacy Belli uh they are the trustees of 61 High Street Reality Trust richard Belli the owner is
here this evening he is also a principal with a point design and that is the project architect for this project also with me tonight is Jay Palakawitz the project engineer he is with Han Hancock
Associates and uh what I'd like to do is give an overview of the project and then I'll ask the project engineer to go into detail on the plan and then uh Mr bachelli as the project architect will handle the architecturals as well as the landscaping plan so this property is
located at 61 High Street in Danvers that's the uh high street mixeduse corridor under the characterbased zoning districts of the downtown area and we are proposing a redevelopment of the existing property to allow for permitted
mixeduse development and that's defined as commercial on the first floor and residential uh above we're proposing uh one first floor commercial as well as covered parking and a second and third floor uh both of which will be
residential the existing property is um improved with a single family home there's approximately uh 15,500 square ft of area with frontage on High Street mr belli and uh his wife have owned and
occupied this property since 2007 and um again Mr velli is the architect uh on this project and has used his knowledge of the property having been a resident there as well as his uh extensive architectural
background to design plans that are in keeping with the intent and purpose of this downtown zoning district specifically the High Street Corridor mixeduse district um as well as to design an attract attractive building that will uh will fit with the the
property um the project involves a a uh removal of the existing building the Danver's preservation commission has reviewed this uh this application for demolition and has found that the uh site is not uh
worthy of um continuation and can proceed forward with demolition that uh process has been completed the uh proposal is to construct a new building as you uh as you see here uh which will
have commercial on the first floor approximately uh 965 square ft of commercial that is a slight reduction over what commercial square footage was in the application and that resulted from what is a six-w week review process
through town departments when we once we submit our application and there were some uh modifications to the plan as it related to some parking uh that'll will go through but um the uh total square footage of commercial is uh 965 square
ft the second floor uh will have four residential units and the third floor will have four residential units uh they will be two-bedroom units each um that represents a uh compliant by density
there is no special permit needed for the density proposed here this is the density permitted by right in the high street corridor zoning district we could have sought a a special permit that would have permitted four additional units we're not doing that here it's
eight units um four on each of the floor again the commercial use and office use is permitted and the residential uses are permitted as well the additional amenities that are proposed to name a few of them we have covered residential
parking underneath um on the first floor below uh I I should say behind the um the office use there is an indoor bike storage indoor trash and recycling room as well as a small fitness area for uh
the residents of the of the property the building uh as you see is uh is fully conforming dimensionally to all of the dimensional requirements of the high street district including the height height permitted in the high street
district is four stories 45 ft in height that is the permitted height uh we are proposing three stories here uh with 31 ft 10 in each of the residential units two-bedroom units modest in size about
1300 square feet um for those uh those units open amenity space uh outdoor amenity space I should say is required in the downtown area at 20% and uh we are proposing 23% outdoor
amenity space this site as you'll see on the site plan also includes a wetland area in the rear of the property that wetland area is not included in the outdoor amenity space percentage that's over and above the 23% of outdoor
amenity space uh and it certainly provides uh wetland area habitat uh open space as well but that is in addition to the 23% of outdoor amenity space that's
provided that amenity space is defined under the different categories in the the bylaw as a fourcourt and a common yard that goes along the side the westerly side as well as the rear uh behind the building um it really is a
beautiful uh thoughtout landscaping plan that includes uh drought tolerant droughtresistant plantings but pavers and sitting areas and it it really is very attractive and you'll see that plan uh when Mr belli presents
[Applause] that parking on the this site we have all of the required parking for the residential uh units are provided on site um we are providing two spaces per
unit uh High Street uh district does allow us to provide only one and a half spaces uh per unit but we are providing a full two units uh two parking spaces per unit for a total of 16 uh parking spaces 12 of those of are tandem and
four uh four are not in addition we are uh proposing um allocation or inclusion of the three parking spaces along the street frontage as is permitted under uh the zoning district um to be the spaces
for the um the commercial space the commercial space of about 960 square ft we need to provide three uh parking spaces and we have three parking spaces um they are public spaces they will continue to be public spaces they're no
way restricted uh or reserved but the bylaw allows us to um consider those as the parking spaces for the commercial uh uses on the site um finally affordable
housing component we have eight new um new units here a total actually of seven net new because there is an existing um dwelling here now uh we are providing one two-bedroom unit uh as the
affordable component and that would be affordable through the state process to uh be categorized as an affordable unit under the local um affordable subsidized housing inventory and that's all part of this project so we are fully compliant
there um we're requesting really very minimal um design type of special permits and some waiverss associated with that but uh this development has really been designed to be um compliant and to meet
certainly the intent of the high street mixed corridor uh district so at this point I will turn this interesting microphone over to Jay Palakowitz you have a pocket i had to hold it yeah if you can just introduce yourself
for the record and can everyone hear me exactly all right uh Jay Blackertz with Hancock Associates uh Josh do you mind going to page two the existing conditions plan so this is the existing condition of 61 High Street starting at the right side
of the plan this is High Street a single family dwelling here with a parking uh area and driveway uh the backyard is developed as lawn and grassy area with a patio all the way over to the west we have uh the
wetlands so uh there's also a 20 foot uh town Danver sewer easement along the southern property line uh do you mind going to sheet C4 z4 this one yep this one's good uh yep that one so uh this is the
proposed conditions uh again High Street on the right side this is the proposed 8 unit uh mixeduse building uh the backyard is going to remain as lawn area uh down here we have a permeable PA driveway up here we have a permeable PA
uh walkway which is also part of the amenity space this is the fourcourt as well as the area in back here is um also considered part of the amenity space um at the rear of the site there is a retaining wall uh that retaining wall is
for the storm water system uh we need to raise that out of the water um 2 feet above groundwater um and so that's why that's there do you mind going to the next sheet so as I was saying this is the storm water system uh this will collect
all the roof runoff from the building um it'll infiltrate it within these chambers and will cut down on peak rates um any overflow from the system will go out to the wetland um mimicking existing drainage conditions uh it'll outfall via a rip wrap um dissipation pad with a
level spreader uh the new building will receive all new uh utility services so electric water sewer gas um and we did receive a letter from the engineering department this morning saying that they were satisfied with our changes i think there were three minor
outstanding items that are construction items similar to the last one CCTB inspection um any plumbing plans to be submitted during the water and sewer process and that we have to file the storm water permit um so I think that's about it for engineering
[Applause] [Applause] richard Bochelli 61 High Street and Day Point Design thank you Nancy and Jay for the great presentation i'd like to touch upon the architecture for a minute here
we'll focus on the front facade i'm taking a nod to a number of buildings on Maple Street particularly 56 to 60 Maple Street 39 to 49 Maple Street 50 Maple Street and 36 Maple Street all are two to
threetory structures with base middle top architecture repeat the numbers again please sure 56 to 60 mhm 39 to 49 50 and 36
okay thank you i took precedence from all of those buildings the idea that 61 High is likely going to be the first building on High Street i wanted to take a nod for Maple Street to try to stretch
that architectural character down High Street again those are all two to three story structures with a base middle top like what we have here the material will be cementitious and
PVC so sustainable materials again I talked about the base middle top we have a heavier base with a darker color some architectural character detailing calling to the facade composition composition section 18 of
the bylaws we've addressed all of that where we don't have blank wall uh the fenestration the character we've addressed all those aspects in the facade design josh can you go to Yes okay while you're switching slides you you used a word I
just want to make sure you use the word cementitious could you explain that please sure so we have wood siding that everybody is traditionally uh accustomed to so cementitious siding is similar to that but it's made out of cement
material that it has a similar look to lap siding it's just a more sustainable product so what we're looking at here something like like a hardy plank or something like that exactly yep exactly
so you're looking at three views okay yeah that's fine that's good so here I I just want to call out what what we're sir whoops
so close-up views looking down the drive aisle between Verizon and the new building with the parking on that side top left image top right image is looking down
the side between the new building and the direct about butter residential property where you see the pavers and the trees in working through this process with my neighbors their concern
was the proximity and massing of the original building that I proposed that we were looking at a four-story building we reduced the massing of the building we're very we we looked we looked at how can we provide the screening and buffering
that would satisfy the neighbors they are here and they could possibly speak to that as well uh we had a lot of conversations about that so we proposed tall narrow trees that there are eight of them along the property line that provide along with a fence that matches
a portion of fence that they have between our properties so we provided that screening and buffering that I believe is satisfactory to what they were looking for the bottom right image is looking from the front down the back
and this is the outdoor amenity space you see the bench in the front which would be part of the fourcourt and then the series of eight trees and the fence the bottom left image is looking across the site to the maple on the corner
um disregard the ADA tactile there that all of that engineering that came through yesterday and today we determined that we were removing the accessible parking space so that ADA tactile is not going to be there mhm next page
please next page this is the ground floor plan verizon is here you see the drive aisle and the parking as Nancy me Nancy mentioned we have the 12 tandem parking spaces plus four non-andom parking
spaces for a total of 16 which is two per unit.5 greater than what is required we have the commercial space on the front of the building here with commercial front entrance residential front entrance that brings you into mail
and all of the common spaces stair up and the fitness center back here bicycle room back here as well so stair and elevator bringing you up to the next floors next page please so this is the second floor and the third floor looks the same there are
four units one here one here here and here with the stair and elevator again as Nancy mentioned there are all around 1300 square ft two-bedroom units next page next
page the roof plan we do not have any amenity space on the roof it is strictly for mechanicals only with roof access hatch to get up to the roof so there will be no activity on the roof and next page these are the
exterior elevations this is the front facade street facade drive vis parking side adjacent to the residence and the rear next page uh actually I think it's part of
the site the landscape on the site the last page probably sorry back this one l1 or L2 uh it doesn't maybe the color one's probably better so here is the building the dry vial the oak that we're proposing on the
front corner this is the outdoor amenity space you can see we have a couple of nice sitting areas we have one at the front facing the street that would be the p part of the public improvement aspect and the eight tall Armstrong maples they're tall and narrow so they
will not grow into the building or over the property line as well they're very well manicured and grow tall and narrow i think that covers everything for now very good
thank you Chair mccann do you have any closing at all or I do okay thank you as Jay mentioned uh we have been working with planning uh staff as well as the
other departments and uh we do have a uh a what we feel is a clean letter uh from the various departments particularly the engineering department having satisfied all of their uh questions and comments um I hope you can see with the
presentation that we've made tonight that this is a project that has been designed to really meet the intent of the High Street district and the requirements as well uh as as much as can practically be done and then a and
then again some some more this is really a fully compliant by right density uh and the the building itself is is compliant with dimensional requirements this project is really what the high street mixed use corridor district
develops th this is really it this is the uh a byite design uh meeting all of those requirements that being said we do have some technical type of special permits and and waiverss which are are really very minor the first special
permit is uh and I'll just go through these and the requirements just so that we're on the record with that information it is all in the application the first special permit is a to allow a bold to a build to zone facade buildout of 59
uh.5% rather than um than 70% and what that means in all of those terms is that the building's a little narrow narrower than what the bylaw calls for the bylaw kind of wants an even wider look along the facade and by making it slightly
narrower at 59 12% rather than 70% it allows us more land for landscaping along that westerly uh lot line we have a street facing wall offset depth of 2 feet rather than 4 feet again that's a a
an articulation within within the building uh design uh a special permit for ground floor transparency the ground floor that's the commercial space transparency um is required to be 60% we are
proposing 39 35.9% and we think that's an appropriate transparency for this type of use it's a commercial use but it's an office use you don't need big windows as you might if this were retail or if it were a
restaurant or something like that where you want the big windows um and as you could see from the elevations that Richard presented to you it's a very nice design it's it's uniform he called upon other uh buildings within the downtown area for that uh for that
design the last is a special permit to allow us uh to recognize I'll use that term to recognize the three parking spaces that exist the public parking spaces along High Street to recognize those as uh being the commercial parking
for the uh very small office use um again those they remain public spaces they're not restricted they're not um regulated in in any way uh they're simply recognized as meeting the parking
requirement for the uh for the commercial use we have uh a couple of waiverss um one is the uh the setback the step back not set back step back requirement again the building is uh is
about 31 um feet tall um 45 is is permitted in the district but there is a step back uh requirement at because the building is located on the front lot line uh to allow uh the height of 31 a
half rather than 25 in that in that section but again the building itself is significantly lower than what would be permitted in the zoning district um I did request in the application a waiver to allow all 100% of the residential
parking spaces to be tandem that waiver is no longer needed because we went through the design review process with staff and we have uh what is permitted percentage 75% 25% are non-andm so we do not need
that waiver anymore seeking a waiver on tandem parking correct correct um as I've outlined in the application um we are providing some uh additional
um public amenities we have uh we are replacing uh the sidewalk uh the existing sidewalk along 61 High Street and uh we are also providing a red oak
um within the uh within the street uh layout section and that will be the planting of that will be coordinated with the DPW department um and we are uh again we're adding those uh those uh public
amenities the uh special permit criteria under section 18.13 is is met as I've outlined in the application the uh project is cons consistent with the purpose of section 18 in general by a
development with a permitted density a permitted mixeduse use with commercial on the first floor and residential above on-site residential parking and abundant uh outdoor amenity space which exceeds the required percentage uh the project
is consistent with the special permit eligibility requirements social and economic and community needs are served by the project which provides active first floor commercial space and new desirable two-bedroom housing units one of which will be affordable adequate
safety of traffic flow access parking and loading uh areas are provided adequate utilities uh for other for utilities and other public services are provided uh positive impacts on pedestrian comfort and safety are
provided uh by the new um the the new sidewalk as well as uh as we do have that uh bench that uh Richard mentioned as well um tax base and employment uh we're providing a a commercial space and
additional tax revenue will be seen from this project um the site plan meets all of the requirements for uh site plan approval under uh the zoning bylaw as well as the zoning regulations so
covering all of that boring stuff um I think that is it and uh we would be happy to answer any questions sounds great okay thank you and we'll take uh first of all I have questions from the from the board and this is a public hearing so we'll um we'll take certainly take questions or comments from members of the public as well so why don't we
start with the um with the board uh Jean do you have any any questions for the applicant um yeah first of all thank you i think this it's a great looking building um fits the purpose of the zoning uh my question was about the
handicap capable spaces those four that are not tandem so are two going to be um two for uh up units and then two for handicap or how is that going to work
i'm going to have Richard speak to that but they are handicapped adaptable okay which means there if there is a need those spaces can be made handicapped okay right the the the code the code requires that we are capable of
providing if there is a need this building is under 20 units so there are no accessible units in the building where it is an 8-unit building we only have to show that we're capable of providing what that really means is if
there is a unit owner that has a disability and a need for an accessible space we are capable of providing it for them okay um so essentially you're providing two
spots per unit and if somebody needs an accessible space then they would have either one or two of those non-tandem spaces correct correct okay thank you um that's my only question okay very good
Mike um thank you for the presentation i appreciate it everyone um the only question I guess I guess I had two question and a comment i guess one question was if you go to the site plan I think Josh or maybe it's on the over um sorry I should probably page on uh
that's good so the only I guess my only concern here is that that snow storage area is just a little awkward and I'm just concerned with wetlands and like pushing snow into that i don't think it's a major issue in terms of the site plan it's just my only like minor concern I guess is that we're so close to that buffer zone and because it is wetland I'm just a little concerned that
you're going to have like snow and salt and stuff like that pushing into the wetland area but again it's a minor concern i just wanted to provide a comment on it yeah the conservation commission will certainly not allow that to happen this project is on the agenda of the conservation commission on Thursday night and uh this has been
designed and with their concerns in mind so I'm I'm sure there will be a restriction on no salt and that sort of thing yeah that was my only concern cuz we obviously know how much snow we get around here it's going to get pushed up there and it's it's probably going to end up in there and I know we can say it won't but it may end up happening so I
just that was a comment don't put restrictions on that yeah and then my other comment was just um this isn't an issue in terms of site plan but it was just a tight drive aisle but I think you know that it's a tight site and I think you guys did a good job like accommodating like what you could and and hopefully helping the neighbors and making them happy so I just wanted to comment that you guys did a good job and
appreciate the the work you put into it so thank you thank you Jim um my only I have a few comments and then my only question is do you you said the type of commercial business would probably primarily be like a office type work
correct yes okay um I I I kind of want to make a comment because you listed out each of the waiverss and it was striking how many there were but I actually find it kind of uh we're in a different position than we usually are because most of the waivers seem to be asked for to actually accommodate things we
typically ask for that's right um so the facade buildout for example um in order to accommodate off- streetet parking you need a drive aisle in order to accommodate space between the abuter you need more space that seems like a a good reason to have a less facade built
out the transparency I need to see how this transparency thing is calculated because I've never really understood like 30% seems oddly low from the the rendering that we're seeing mhm regardless I think you've already sort of described that being appropriate for the type of business the onre parking
offset so if you did just you could technically if my math is right fit the commercial parking requirement in the spaces under the building if you did one and a half per unit instead of two for residential is that correct it becomes a little trickier because of
the need to have an adaptable space right um tandem parking too and the tandem parking that's right it one and a half spaces works but when you have tandem you can't share the tandem space
so with a project that is this small the one and a half sometimes becomes difficult it's almost easier to provide two than one and a half when you're talking about only eight units and a project this size so um it it also in
practical terms uh as was mentioned the dry bile is somewhat narrow and uh it it's wider than it needs needs to be and it certainly meets the the requirements but it makes sense to have um recognized
those public parking spaces along the street for the commercial because that's really where people are going to park and rather than trying to come in and and go to a business and you're you're pulling in and you're parking under the building it's a little it's a little unusual so it just seems in considering
all of this it makes sense to allow that um that recognition of those spaces because in actuality that's where the parking is going to happen that makes sense the um so in terms of the other
waiverss then the the four court three sides that doesn't seem like a huge issue the building step back is it is the building crooked like is it is it only the corner that touches the lot line no what the what the bylaw says is
that for 10 ft back from the street it's down 25 25 ft even though the actual height in the district is 45 uh that first 10 ft back is supposed to be stepped back
to 25 ft and we're requesting to be able to go to 31 and a half simply for a lot of reasons for the design of this building and impacts of the site that we're trying to accommodate um and the wetlands that we have to deal with in the wetland no disturb zones in the back
so uh we've got an attractive design and um that is again lower than what it could otherwise be so that's what the step back is it's a it's a weird kind of provision that you find in one chart under the bylaw that you you know and
you're supposed to be 10 feet back at at 25 ft okay I think that's it yeah I mean I'll echo what I said i think it's a great plan so thank you for the Okay um I have some uh some questions for the applicant and I guess the um I'm I'm very familiar with
this site because having served also as a member of the preservation commission we've you know I'm familiar with the with you know with the request for the um in terms of the the demolition permit from uh before and even having done a I think we even did a site visit on the site as well and it's a very you know
it's a very well-kept site i mean it's a very you know that you know the existing property existing house is is a is lovely kept and so it's um uh so um you know so I it's a it's a bit bittersweet but the um but in terms of the just um
it's my understanding I understand preservation commission rule you know you know found it was I believe historically significant but not worthy of being uh preserved um is the the building will be demolished or is actually the building going to be potentially moved i wasn't sure if that
was just curious in terms of you indicate was going to be removed i wasn't sure sure so I I did look at moving it we found a site in town that I was working with the current owner to move i brought my building move company in to evaluate that move and they said
it's just not feasible okay and to to be frank they said the the days of moving buildings are really behind us moving a building from one part of a site to another part of a site or a couple doors down that can be a little bit more
feasible but once you start looking at sites in other neighborhoods bridges wires trees just make it next to impossible to do okay but I I have been trying and not done trying you know maybe Tom next door will take it and put
it on his property who knows okay we are trying i appreciate you checking on it i I I do so um in terms of the in terms of the building um in terms of the the design um so uh and I know that and I appreciate you referencing some of the
other you know areas because um uh because I know we've heard some you know you know you know some residents have have talked about it at some of our meetings about you know of flat roof buildings and in terms of and I understand that that flat roof is allowed as a you know that's that's
allowed within the within the the zoning here and so I wasn't sure if you had if you'd looked into doing a different type of a roof style or I I did not um I you know for a building like this the design and engineering of it you know really
calls for a flat building to put all the mechanical systems up they have venting through the building it just makes the most sense for this type of building and again calling you know paying paying a nod to those buildings on um Maple Street you know the the facade is really
what you're focusing on for the design yeah no I understand like and I I appreciate like the I think you said 39 to 49 Maple Street which I think is the the you know as oldtimes refer to as the Tommpkins building right so CF Tommpkins so um which is an older building and
it's it's it's flat roofed so um the um question with respect to the um with respect to the uh um uh I guess in terms of the height because I and I actually just walked over there today um and saw and was just looking just sort of
comparing it sort of to the Verizon building um what is the current uh how would it compare to the height of the Verizon building next door it will be lower to to what that number is i can't yeah cuz I know the Verizon is like two stories but it seems But you there's a
there's a pretty like a almost like a 5ft stairway going up to the first floor and then the floors themselves seem taller yes my my guess based on my experience that building is 40 to 42 feet tall okay got it um and in terms of
your uh in terms of um building materials and I know that this is something that we've you know uh that you we've done other other developments we've uh and I think you mentioned it during the presentation we've generally uh asked for a you know
like a um you know like fiber cement siding as opposed to vinyl or that sort of thing yes okay and that's something that you would be that that is the intention that it will be cementitious siding PVC trims yes
okay um with a question with respect to and this this might be getting into the sort of in the parkingish area um so I know that some of it will be tan you know there'll be tandem for uh I guess there'll be 12 of the spaces will be tandem correct okay so 12 spaces will be
tandem the length is um I know the length of the tanning tandem spot I believe is 33 feet so just in terms of an operation I know that you know vehicles can be you know I have a a pretty modestized pickup truck which is
17t long so how does that sort of work with today you know a lot of people drive have SUVs and such and I know the fire department was concerned about the driveway being um being you know not you know that the driveway would not be used like or parking in the driveway so I
guess the concern I have is of of cars sticking out for lack of a better word can I address that absolutely so the we exceed the requirement for tandem parking which I think is 30 isn't it correct 30 and we're also we also have
another foot in front of the parking where the the building structure is that we're not counting okay and then we have a three-foot walk aisle pedestrian aisle at the front so technically
we're six feet more than what is required for tandem so I feel we've consciously addressed your concern okay so you would take into that would take into account maybe someone having a slightly larger vehicle or bad parking job that sort of thing yes okay got it
um and with respect to the the commercial parking on the front on you know on on High Street and I noticed that um so I assume there there's currently two curb cuts in front of the the existing building so I assume there will be only one curb cut correct and
then the um and so the three spaces will be in front correct um and so I guess the question I have is will the the the parking the design you know the tandem as well as the other parking will be all um they will be all uh
that's all going to be for residential so let's say if you end up if if if if someone who lives there in the two two-bedroom only has one vehicle will the commercial space start using the residential or will all be in the in the front yeah we we anticipate the commercial being used on the front and
for a for an area like this we anticipate the user being someone like myself an architect an engineer that isn't necessarily having people come to their office so that those spaces are required but
may not be used so we could see neighbors using them visitors using them but to your point of the potentially one unit owner having one parking spot their other parking spot could be for a guest mhm okay which is there's no requirement
for guest parking sure but again we're being conscious to the need for parking and providing more than what is required got it and in terms of the um I know you mentioned I think unit owner does this anticipate is this are these these these
units will be rental or condo or unsure at this point they will likely start as rental and transition to condos after some time okay got it and will there be a will there be I think there's a will there be a management office as well there okay got it
okay i think I have a number of I think I got most of my questions in i may come back and ask a few more any other questions for members of the board before we I just have one quick question it's not really site planning related but obviously it's an older home um on the site is there any
plan to you work with like an architectural salvage or like a like habitat remain to like donate any materials or is it not really at that point that you can do that there is really nothing there yeah I was just curious those are worthy um the the
house I purchased it from a flipper and they got rehabed house okay nothing left there i was just curious thank you appreciate it yeah i remember you mentioning that during the preservation commission proceedings that there really wasn't much inside the the
home anymore so Okay all right no other further um well um before we go to public com um comments I know we received a a letter from a from a member of the public and so I just before we before it came to um asking members of
the public to give a comment I just wanted to acknowledge that we did receive a um an email today from a member of the public um so I just I just read it for into the record that's fine okay uh it's it's brief and so just it's um it's from Annette Collins and it says
"Dear planning board members my name is Annette Collins precinct one town meeting member and I have some observations and comments on the proposed site also I have questions relating to the necessary permits waiverss and zoning particulars my overall observation is that this piece of property is not appropriate for the plan which is presented traffic on High
Street is extremely busy with curb cuts accessing many businesses it is also across from a busy gas station and very close to our main fire station uh some comments refer to the structure which is proposed the renderings show a square box style and a need for street parking for the ground level commercial unit
floor two and three which amount to 8 to twobedroom apartments have a total of 12 spaces required uh these are shown as under the rear of the building with open entry the commercial property on the ground level requires three spaces listed as needing street parking permits this one piece of property will add to
the already busy high street traffic uh the request for waiverss and special permits listed on the agenda show an unnecessary redevelopment plan and require some explanation as to why propose a redevelopment which will need the planning board to say yes to each request i would ask that the board deny
any special permits and waiverss uh thank you so that was from Annette Collins who who emailed I just wanted to read that into the into the record so um if any members of the public have any um come up to the podium and please address any questions to um to the chair and we
have the development team uh able to answer any questions as well thanks uh Nova San town meeting member precinct one um I have three questions do you want me to do one at a time or just throw them all out there but we'll see if you want however way you feel is okay
so um with the outdoor amenity space I'm curious if there's any in the backyard i know that there's wetlands back there but is there any sort of privateish space for the residents where they could like grill or anything like that okay there's one question um okay why is the
actually why don't we see if um is that something that the the Yes the answer is yes yes yes there there is we there will be some amendy space in the in the rear yes generally in this area okay okay great um is there a reason why the
commercial space is already sort of being predetermined to be an office and not like a retail i understand it wouldn't be a restaurant obviously because you would have to build out more ventilation and stuff when you're building but um I'm just curious as to why we're setting it sort of as an
office space i feel like there's a lot of office space and not enough you know small workshop space or something like that um and my third question is what are the roof materials going to be if there's going to be runoff that goes
into the system that goes into the wetlands area okay what what's going to be on the roof that could contaminate okay great thank you so for the applicant first question I guess in involving the um sort of the the office
space versus commercial what sort of went into the you know went into the calculus there one initial thought was it may be my office okay okay um and then another thought was look looking at the bylaws there are
uses that have parking requirements and we fit into the category of you know business office use it doesn't necessarily mean it has to be a business there are other opportunities there as
well but that's the category we chose okay got it okay okay and then another question came up in terms of um runoff in terms of roofing materials and um and runoff and and once you address that too I'm I'm also interested a bit in the uh
in the paving as well okay but roof first so the the roof will be a traditional rubber roof you know vents will project through the roof um there's nothing hazardous or any materials that will be run off there will be internal
drains that come through the building and out into the system jay might want to elaborate on that a little bit but there's nothing hazardous um if I'm answering your question was it as something which Yeah it's it's a it's a
traditional rubber roof okay and sorry what was the other per permeable pavers yeah I was asking about that in terms of the what was the sort of um uh I mean the idea of having I think permeable pavers is I I I mean I find that preferable just than black top
yes um but was there a reason for for using permeable pavers or So a couple of reasons infiltration you know we needed the we we needed to have it be permeable uh we did address the concerns of
salting and sanding so we're not going to be using materials for snow removal so again we we feel we've been very conscious with the proposed project here and have worked closely with the town
for quite some time now to address a lot of these concerns that have been brought up okay got it okay thank you any other um comments from members of the public go ahead and I will also I ask the applicant to also address some of the concerns that
was in the the written comment as well just in terms of um some of the traffic and things like that but go ahead good evening uh Amy Butler town meeting member precinct one um I think that they have thought out of a a lot of things
but there's one thing that I really want to voice a concern regarding um In less than a year there have been three pedestrians hit on High Street in the downtown area including two at the
crosswalk right by where this um proposed building is going to be one of the people that was hit had to be medflighted um to Boston in addition there are frequent traffic accidents there as well
this project adding a blind driveway and to get approval needs a special permit for those parking spaces in front adds even more traffic volume at the location which could be a very serious issue if you look at the drawings and the driveway configuration
if there's any on street parking in front of the building which it appears there will be for the commercial units i'm especially concerned that it'll make it difficult for traffic coming down High Street heading towards 128 to see any vehicles trying to leave
the apartment unit that area is very congested there's a gas station across the street there's the fire station um there's the crosswalk thus creating more congestion and make the intersection at Porter and High Street more dangerous possibly
creating a recipe for disaster leading to more accidents injury and possible death the last modification to the traffic pattern in the area by the state at 128 and High Street we can all agree is a nightmare and not an improvement i
think that the plan needs to address this that the board needs to address this that we need to have a plan maybe a committee with the state the town the developer and neighbors to come up with some safe
traffic method um for this area and the planning board should not grant any special waiverss for this area especially this particular project with on on street parking being counted for
the commercial units um until um there's some sort of consensus of everybody and um so there's no more there's no death or any injury
um I understand more housing is needed in the area and I believe this location just needs to be looked into a little further with those things thank you thank you okay i asked the applicant to address I guess the the question of of
traffic safety and of the of pedestrians potentially I guess pedestrians as well as automobiles coming out of there if you have the if you have an on- street parking well there is on street parking right um and uh it it certainly is there the the
uh sidewalk is going to be improved as I said it's going to be completely replaced and approved and that will be um through a process with the select board uh where we uh we get approval for doing for doing that work um and to what
they call occupy the sidewalk while while the construction is going on um there are a lot of commercial uses along this this uh this stretch this is a corridor that the planning uh department and the planning board has
looked at for redevelopment and this is what is proposed here there is a Dver Danvers traffic advisory committee and it sounds like perhaps there is a need for this corridor to be reviewed by that committee um it isn't just a this site
issue it sounds like it it sounds like it is more a corridorwide issue if there's something that can be done with uh crosswalks or something that needs to be done but it's not a a a situation where this is this uh limited project of
eight units is going to exacerbate that and again we've gone through um review with all of the town departments including the engineering department they typically raise issues if there are issues with crosswalks or if there are issues with site distances or anything like that that has all been reviewed and
met uh and satisfied with the town departments uh but there is always the opportunity um for the traffic advisory committee to undertake a corridor review i'd like to add to that be being the
homeowner there since 2007 um I I respect the comments about the accidents because I've witnessed them i hear them and see them happen uh so I I am aware of those accidents uh currently there are two curb cuts with a U-shaped
driveway and everyone and anyone uses my driveway to pull into and then back out of because they went past their destination uh so I feel we're we're reducing that challenge by people pulling in halfway into my driveway over
the sidewalk and then backing out into the street uh we also set the corner of that building back an additional 4T so there's about 10 ft from the corner of the building to the street so there's a clear view across High Street to get in
and out of the drive by okay um thank you josh has asked town staff just with respect to this this traffic issue you know I mean traffic and pedestrian safety i mean what can um I know it was mentioned that that engineering staff
didn't didn't raise that but is that something typically that that engineering staff would raise as opposed to you know the I mean is this something I guess the question is is it is it um is it worthy to um to have uh you know
consultations with the applicant and the traffic advisory committee yeah I mean it definitely um I'm you know aware of that crosswalk at the Port Street intersection i guess I didn't know that that number of I guess we
would say current current situations or um it does seem sort of like uh something that is either a DTAC type situation or like a
planning you know department type corridor study or evaluation as you know this corridor this section of town you know does you likely get redeveloped sort of similar to this but at different parcels right over the next 5 to 10 15
years um it's certainly something that you know obviously safety is you know the number one issue or you know number one concern um you know is it it's hard to say you
know traffic there's kind of I kind of look at it as different buckets sort of situation right so there's like the car the traffic in terms of volume on high street and then there's one of the other buckets is you know just looking at the pedestrian at that particular crosswalk
at that particular intersection if there are situations you know if there were like three three accidents or issues or crashes at this intersection recently you know what is what is what is happening right um I
think that further kind of evaluation you know at this one particular inter intersection might you know might warrant you know warrants more type of research right for sure i part of me is wondering because I understand what what attorney McCann was saying that this is
one piece of it one piece of it but you know one piece of it then it's because then you have another piece then you have another and so I think it you know I you know so in terms of um because they are um because the applicant is is
is is seeking to be able to put some of the commercial spaces on High Street whether or not there should be a um you know whether there they should also O be um you know required to consult with the traffic advisory committee and town
staff to uh to at least address potential you know traffic safety you know traffic safety issues if I may the this applicant is paying a transportation mitigation fee correct that's right of $42,000
$42,738 right where does that money go that's interest that's we have that's a that's a fund for transportation for transportation projects yeah downtown $42,000 sounds like a a good amount of money so So yes uh as as Brian and Aaron
will allude to I think late this afternoon we had this conversation as I was leaving that we should use that money for these types of things so um whose discretion is it of how we use that money um I don't know if it's just staff or
staff with direction from the planning board i I'm not I'm not 100% sure about that but it's Is there existing reporting of where previous transportation mitigation fees have been spent we haven't spent any of them yet so everything we've collected for everything we've approved that's had this fee is just kind of sitting in a
pot somewhere yes but it's not we're not losing it or you know it's we with the idea of things as this discussion come up we might have the ability to do something about it so okay yep that
sounds like something we should discuss yes um just for informationational for the board um just about these three spaces out front as we speak right now these three spaces currently exist right mhm so
people could as we speak right now they're not creating new spa just informational they're not creating three new spaces as we speak right now people can folks visitors residents people who don't live near here these three these
three spaces could be utilized today tomorrow and the next day so the special permit is essentially just the de this development or applicant just being credited for these three spaces up front but the three existing spaces the three existing spaces that are already along the
frontage of the site and Josh just to to follow up on that those three existing spaces would be for the commercial which all the spaces pulling through the curb cut are residential so the curb trips a day would be a lot less than a commercial property so all your properties past his property are retail
part like you have the old house of pizza you have Jimmy's old location you have McDonald's you have gas stations you have locations that are going to have way more trips per day than his residential property pulling out so I guess what I'm trying to say is that having those commercial spots on the
street you're going to have not have people pulling out more often you're going to have just the residential people pulling out more often so it's beneficial to have those spots on the street cuz it's safer than having them pull through a sidewalk and pull through a curb cut into a street that they're unfamiliar with whereas people who are familiar with the location who are residential owners are going to be
familiar because they're going to be pulling in and out of there i'm sure he's much safer pulling out of that driveway than if I pulled out of there because he's pulled out of there a million times over the last 20 years so I was kind of thinking something similar as this conversation you know kind of occurred right i mean I
think the residents obviously the first couple times pulling out of that driveway it will be new new but I feel like kind of like everyone in our daily life that we kind of would you know after a couple times would start to
understand you know how it sort of works um obviously taking lefts will be more difficult than taking rights and that sort of thing um but I think that's a decent point the commercial or probably more high turnover spaces are not going in will likely will not be going in to
the driveway so okay so just coming back I guess to the whole you know to the you know so I know we had so we had a discussion about sort of the transportation mitigation fee that's being spent here and sort of concerns about about you know traffic
safety i mean how do we sort of reconcile some of the concerns that you know that our residents have here in terms of of traffic safety i mean in terms of is that something also um you know I know the you know the applicant has been you know I know has worked with
town staff on on on this on this plan um you know in terms of are they um is the applicant also you know willing to work with town staff with respect to um you know with respect to you know the traffic safety issues that may arise
from this development did you answer go ahead okay um I think what you hear what the concerns are you know oh I hear what the concerns are absolutely and recognizing however that the zoning regulations have built into
them this fee for transportation study and and review and whatever is needed along here so I think what the board could do as part of this process is
recommend that the 40 almost $42,000 that's being paid by this applicant for the transportation mitigation fee be used to look at that particular crosswalk for example that was raised i think the planning board
while you can't require it of staff I think you can make that recommendation having heard comments during the hearing that that that at least that portion of the fund which is considerable $42,000 is a lot of money to look at uh at
whether anything needs to be done with that crosswalk and maybe there is something that may needs to be done and maybe there isn't i don't know but I think this applicant as Richard described has pulled the building back for example and the corner that he's talking about is right here um to
increase visibility uh and all of the other comments that we've heard with regard to what's been done with this site and decreasing number of curb cuts from two to one that's work that has been uh already incorporated into this
plan by the applicant but I think take I would suggest as uh something that could be done by this board is making that recommendation to planning staff that that's what that money is used for because it is a little concerning and you know that I've had a number of
projects uh that have paid the transportation mitigation fee and um apparently none of it has been used yet so it's probably a pretty good sum but I don't think there's anything that um prohibits the board making at least that
recommendation to whether it's staff or whatever department i guess I don't think it would be staff a department that would decide where that money is used mhm i'd like to add that from a professional
point of view crosswalks could be marked in a different color instead of just having two white lines showing that you're crossing the street they could be completely white they could be hatched they could be a different color there could be something that the entire
downtown corridor applies to all these crosswalks to make them more noticeable um and one one of those accidents that happened um unfortunately the and and I know all
these facts because the police department came to me for my cameras um the the gentleman came shooting out of Porter Street on a bicycle and just darted right out into the street whether he knew that there was a crossing street
there or a crosswalk or the oncoming traffic clearly couldn't see that you know maybe there needs to be some overall attention to the downtown corridor and how we cross these streets okay got it okay um not
getting obviously we're still in public comment but just turning back to I guess to the to the board what's the sense of the board in terms of this um in terms of this sort of this traffic issue and and with respect to the transportation
mitigation fee do you have a comment to Yeah I mean I think this isn't the first time we've heard this sort of collective action issue right which is there's a larger problem that one particular development might be contributing to so do we hold up their development because we haven't solved the larger problem and one of the
only mechanisms available to us to actually address that is a mitigation fee mhm and so it sounds like we have the tools in front of us to just request that we use that to address this problem mhm i would say that our what we're asking is for them to pay a fee they're
paying the fee so we shouldn't be holding up their project it's it's our responsibility to now use that money to do what we said we should do we shouldn't do anything to their project if they're they're paying the fee that's what we're asking them to do and they're doing that and in my opinion we should then use the money to do what we believe
needs to be done i don't think it's at the expense of their project it's just my opinion jean I agree with that okay right so Josh what are your in terms of what do you need from from us or is the collective you know the I I think it's
coming from the from the the board here is that that is that I think the concern that this transportation mitigation fee you know because it is set forth that it's it's you know it's a it's a pay you know payment that it's the transportation mitigation fee assoc associated with the new square footage
um of the of of the property mhm and so that you know that we would recommend that the that that be implemented for any modifications or or or study or in you know that's caused by this project yeah i mean I think that the kind of how
we want to use that money is sort of maybe like a bigger like a bigger kind of qu question I think from the at least from the department standpoint um so why it hasn't been when you asked one of you asked like why hasn't been used I think we're just sort of like
trying to figure out what is you know because obviously that type of money is scarce resource right so what's the best I think it's coming from the I think it's coming from the planning board that it be used for the um you know I think the consensus is that be used you know
to address the concerns related to the site okay I have a question that could you go and um we're in public comment so just Yep just go and uh uh state your name for the record please
thanks hi my name's Art Butler i'm uh one of the neighbors also um a question is is that's 35 um would the town even be able to do anything on that route or would that be a state issue that's a that's another there's a kind of you
know there's lots of layers to this and that's that's a pos possibility i don't know that would we be even able to use that $42,000 to do that it's possible not i just at this at this moment I don't know that answer um but it's possible that well I
think it's coming down to the I mean I think anything that I I think what's coming from I think what I'm getting from the sense of the board is that we would be making that that we would be recommending that town staff look into that for this for this property and if ultimately you know to the extent it it
is It's not possible and then we we get we we cross that bridge when we come to it I guess sure okay and then I had another uh question looks like a very nice design and everything but um now what's the the status of the trash how
many um bins will each unit have and where on the street will that be put okay great thank you there's a question about the trash in terms of Yeah yeah so we'll we'll obviously have to have uh private trash collection we have a trash
room josh is zooming into it uh there's I provided a calculation on the top left as well for trash and recycling based on national needs of trash and recycling we are exceeding what is required or it's
not a requirement what's suggested we are exceeding that internally in the building and then we will have private pickup and just like we do currently it will be put out onto the sidewalk and be picked up by the private collector
okay got it thank you okay any further uh questions members of the public i think saw your hand first uh John Bushard Crossline Circle just as a suggestion for safety issues you go down the street to McDonald's when you
come out of the drive-thru it says right turn only mhm would that be beneficial to something like this rather than having 16 residents try to cut across I Street if it was a right turn only coming out of their driveway mhm they would be able to see up the street and
be able to enter traffic very safely as opposed to cutting across which is causes problems that's just a suggestion mcdonald's did it with their sign okay i'll I'll pose that to the applicant is that uh have you considered any of that
sort of thing and I guess since you live in that that area you can comment a little bit about the left versus right and so on um I have not considered that and you know living here for 20 years no one lets you out in the street
you have to wait your turn and wait for space and get out there so I don't see that being any different in the future that people are just going to have to be patient and wait until there's space to get out there and go yeah okay well I I I grew up on the corner near the corner
of Endicott and Water Street and so that was always very used to that was the uh sort of quite a baptism by fire when you're learning how to drive sure and I just want to comment too about that whole McDonald's lot as most of us know there is an island in the middle of the
in-n-out and I see it every day i walk up and down that street constantly and people are always going in the out it it's there there are challenges over there sure okay thank you another question yeah you just identify yourself for the
record and Yeah i'm Malcolm Patterson i'm the uh next Rick's next door neighbor at 59 High Street oh 59 um uh I just have a couple of one uh comment really and a couple of concerns uh first of all I want to say that um myself and Rich and my other neighbor have been uh
in conversations about this project for a long time he's been uh very helpful in providing all the information so I want to just put that out there that's uh I appreciate that and it's been well received by myself and my by my neighbor um I guess my comment really is as a neighbor it's it's the basically the
eyesore at the one you see beside my house uh going from a I guess a residential place that we have right now with our family having grown up there for these last 15 years to what uh is going to be right next to us right now is not something that's pleasing to me um having said that I do agree that
obviously these laws have already been made for the town that uh these developments can take place and I will say that he's made a nice job on the planning and the architectural side of that my concerns uh the first concern has already been addressed and probably over addressed tonight about the the traffic and the issues outside of that
house uh my kids and myself looking into numerous fights through the years trying to get them across for school outside the property um I do think that it it definitely is not just with people being knocked down but adding on there there's probably been at least 15 to 20 crashes that I have seen myself out there u
within that uh within that junction itself that needs to be addressed uh a couple of concerns just that I have on the property that's again we didn't really get a chance to but with all the water and the I guess I guess the flow of water going back into the wetlands uh how will that affect my property with
maybe flooding coming up from the wetlands into my backyard uh right now I do get some flooding back there but the potential of maybe more of that with more I guess water and everything going back into that wetland area how can that be addressed that it wouldn't actually come further up my my my property okay
and that might be actually this might getting into the uh I because I I think the applicant is going to be for conservation commission but if you can if you can comment on that to the extent that it you know that relates to because I think it's relevant to us
as well in terms of that yeah so we designed a storm water infiltration system that'll be collecting all the roof runoff um so that'll be cutting down on peak rates of runoff uh volume of runoff um the engineering department
really reviews these plans for that and uh they said it looked good to them so uh we are reducing peak rates and volume okay and I guess a question also for the the applicant as well um I think again I don't want to tread into conservation commission territory but you're you're
going before them as well for will will they be looking at some of those issues as well in terms of um you know in terms of you know water runoff and that sort of thing uh sure they they look at that but Danvers also has
now yet another layer of approval through the storm water bylaw which is separate so there's a storm water permit that has to be applied for and Jay has already been working very closely with the uh town engineering department
they've reviewed the storm water calculations and the infiltration system that Jay mentioned so that's already been reviewed so there's really three layers uh of review all that kind of include storm water conservation Commission will look at that but as Jay
just said this project because of the infiltration system is reducing not only the rate of flow but also the volume okay uh both of which reduce uh overexisting conditions okay and a question as well I guess just came to
mind as well in terms of um construction sequencing and such and how that's going to and again concern for the neighbors concern for the neighborhood the abutters um what steps are you going to be you're all going to be taking what you know you'll have you know what communication you'll have so if there is
an issue that comes up uh that they'll be a that neighbors will be able to get some you know some relief if there's a there's a question sure i'm going to let Jay talk to the construction sequencing we do have a plan that talks through that um but I I do just in layman's
terms a little bit i want to say that we can't control the water that comes from the wetlands that is what it is we're controlling what's on our property and reducing the existing to the proposed okay
got it one uh while Jay is getting up there I will say one of the conditions of approval uh will be that we have a construction sequencing plan uh and phasing plan that we submit to staff and we review that and and part of that
purpose is to keep communication going uh and making sure that uh any concerns with regard to sequencing and how things are moving forward are are dealt with okay very good
yes uh so the notes on the left uh the lowest one is our construction sequence so we'll start with our the installation of our erosion controls the uh construction fencing could you speak up a little bit you said construction erosion uh erosion control construction
entrance yeah they're listed here okay um and then we would uh do the site demolition and then utility in foundation installation then building the building then parking spaces finishing landscaping removing
all the project whenever the conservation commission is signed up right and what is your anticipated timeline in I mean obviously considering you know you know approvals here approvals at conservation commission what's the what's the anticipated timeline
[Music] to be determined okay but we do hope that we would be in construction by the fall of 2025 but there are a lot of variables that come into play when you're preparing for construction uh so I don't
I don't have definitive answer but that is the target right now as far as the length of construction for a project like this it's likely 10 to 14 months for the project okay got it and you'll still and you'll be still you'll you'll
stay involved in terms of on-site and that sort of thing i expect to be the project architect for the project so yes uh it is a controlled construction project so it is my responsibility to participate sure okay
very good thank you yeah my just last comment was Kenny you touched on is regarding the construction itself and what happens during that construction i know myself and Richard obvious had this conversation as well that uh during the actual I guess the demolition which we uh seems to be the
case right now what we talked about tonight uh how that may affect my property regarding the equipment that's been used next to my property and and what states are there I just want to state it for the record that I will obviously uh take pictures and document if there is any damage there but um if
there is any procedure that could help u maybe make that easier in that process and uh that would be appreciated okay i was going to ask um you're at 59 High Street right that's correct yeah how old is the building is your house uh I think it's uh 1910 1910 yeah I believe so got
it okay um just a question for the applicant I guess in terms of you know knowing how and you know myself living in a you know in a house built in the 1920s um you know and so with you know things that you get cracks and that sort of thing so what steps are going to be
taken particularly here because this is a it's a you know you see the signs thickly settled and it's a uh and they're older they're older homes which may be more prone to cracks and that sort of thing so what steps are are you all taking sort of that you take here as
opposed to taking in another part of town where there's newer buildings good question you know demolition of buildings like this are very straightforward and you know my experience the the the 18 rails that jet
down that street are much more disturbing to our foundations than the demolition of a woodframe structure okay but not just demolition but also concern about construction and that sort of thing just I I think the cons I think the overall concern is is just be um you
know I think to the extent to be as gentle as possible of course you know and I I respect my neighbors and you know we have a great relationship we've been working together through this entire process to understand their concerns we've talked about that and you
know I've been doing this for 30 years and I've never experienced a situation like that but there's always a first time for everything so you know I am aware of what his concerns are and we'll do everything we can to make sure that
that doesn't happen good okay good thank you mr bates thank you uh Bill Bates town meeting member precinct 4 uh first and foremost thank you to the planning board for your volunteerism and serving this town it's
very much appreciated thank you this project is is exactly what we talked about 10 years ago when we were involved in trying to reszone downtown and High Street um it it's
exciting the owner had put out a sign over a year ago and I went and knocked on his door cuz he had a picture of it over a year ago i said "What is this what are you trying to do?" and I sat in his backyard and and he talked about the neighbors and uh the fact that he had
two lots and that this you know could be done so I'm excited about the project and I hope that you will support it um couple of comments I wanted to make i'm also a crossing guard in this town and
um we have very poor um conditions for pedestrians i am very excited that for the first time the traffic advisory committee to my knowledge first time they have a budget this year
um of an additional $10,000 for a rapid beacon um sign at Maple and Burley Street where I happen to be the crossing guard the neighbors we went to the traffic advisory committee and said this is the
most dangerous crosswalk that we know of you'll see the ones at the rail trails they have these signs these rapid beacon things well those were paid for by grants that they the good old people that work on that um the trail rail
trail um but we're going to get one at at Maple and Burley Street it's been approved it's in this year's budget we'll be at FINCOM supporting it this next week um they cost $9,000 so to look at Porter Street and High
Street uh with the crosswalk there boy oh boy I think that's probably a great area for a $9,000 beacon um and there's a few different ways of going i'm working with Aaron Henry right now because if you
look at um 114 and the college Marramac College they actually have a push button that will go orange and then red and stop the traffic at the crosswalk so that the students can cross to the housing across the street on 114 we've
asked Aaron to look at that i don't know what the price is on that and we don't we're going to find out but as somebody mentioned we have got to do better for our pedestrians in this town it It's disgusting uh what I see out there every
day now is just it it's deplorable we can do better we must do better um I guess that's it um like I say I love the project and to have a local developer a
a resident do this kind of thing is is wonderful and I hope you'll support it okay thank you thank you okay there we go any other um Mr brad Street Bill Brad Street town meeting
member precinct one uh occasionally in this town when there's a snowstorm we have no on street parking the town does an excellent job of throwing snow off the road making
large bumpers down the road uh with what they're planning on building if all that snow ends up on their property how does that affect their I guess tenants or the town with
them trying to get in in and out of their property especially with the tandem parking i'd always mentioned that the snow storage will end up in the back and hopefully won't end up in the wetlands out but aside from that part
what about the snow out front i'd hate to see the uh fire department have an issue trying to go to a response and having to deal deal with that snow up front i know it's minor but it does snow
it does snow thank you for the applicant just a question in terms of of snow removal um would you have a would would that be contracted or what is the Yeah there there will obviously be a contract for snow removal it will include our drive aisle the sidewalk it does not
include the street but anything that comes off the street onto the sidewalk we will take care of uh there could be a likelihood of having to move off site some snow i own another piece of property in Danvers and we had to do that this year in February when we had a
lot of snow we had to move some off site okay there are ways to manage the snow and uh be aware of the limitations we have okay good thank you oh yeah mr b go ahead sorry no no
problem one other issue I wanted to address was the um no right turn or no left turn out of there that's fine for businesses we do that to to people that are you know consumers but these are going to be Danver's residents please don't make that if they can like
somebody said if you learn how to get out of that driveway um you'll do it safely um but because they're residents and not commercial customers please don't put that restriction in there okay no I would I would Yeah I would be in terms of the in terms of the the turning
like that I would be um It'll work yeah i mean it seems to be you know again getting used to you know again growing up on Water Street and even turning from Endeicott Street onto water the house was like the second one in having to learn how to use an arm signal so that someone behind you wouldn't go and rear end you so um but no I I I I wouldn't
Yeah because I' I'd also be concerned frankly if you did a a right turn like that right turn only of then just someone going a few doors down and then turning around and doing a you know trying to do it you know doing a U-turn in like the fire department or something like that so um any other um comments
from uh from members of the public i come back to the um to the planning board any any additional questions or or comments so the um I guess Josh one thing just
you know we we do want to um just to uh you know just to address I think at at some you know address with with town staff is is the is as we talked about I think you you received a um pretty clear you know in terms of our concerns with
respect to uh traffic safety pedestrian pedestrian safety particular and then the um and then maybe and then use of the uh the transportation mitigation fee i'm sure the Yes uh we will definitely have an internal conversation tomorrow
for sure so Okay about that item okay good okay so we have um uh so if there's no further uh comments from members of the um the board we have uh we have two
items that will be that are before us so we have the uh we have the special permit and we have the site plan uh and the site plan so um so Josh do we need a do we need a motion to close public hearing on Yes on each individually
that's right okay all right so I'd like to entertain a motion and so close public hearing and then the vote on correct the actual item correct is that right so I'd like to entertain a motion to close the public hearing on the
special special permit it's Yeah yes make a motion we special permit for 61 Yeah high Street make a motion we close the special permit for 61 High Street second okay there's a motion been made to close the public hearing for the for
the special permits made first by Jean second by Mike uh any discussion on that motion okay hearing none all in favor please say I i i any opposed none okay so now we have a so uh so now we have
the the motion itself for the uh for the special permit i ask the clerk to to read that grant of special permit for 61 High Street date of application February 11th 2025 date of hearing April 8th 2025
date of decision April 8th 2025 this is to certify that at a meeting of the Danverse planning board held on April 8th 2025 having been requested under sections 18.5 d.5.8 A and 18.13 of the
zoning bylaw for property located at 61 High Street assessor's map 51 lot 303 voted to approve the request submitted by Richard and Stacy Bochelli trustees of 61 High Street Realy Trust for special permits to allow
a mixeduse development shown on the following plans 61 High Street site development 61 High Street Danvers Mass 01923 prepared by Apoint Design Incorporated dated January 31st 2025 consisting of eight
sheets permit site plan 61 High Street Danverse Massachusetts 019223 prepared by Hancock Associates dated January 31st 2025 revised to April 4th 2025 consisting of 11 sheets
supporting material materials include lighting plan prepared by Echoling Incorporated dated January 24th 2025 and associated lighting detail sheets storm water report prepared by Hancock Associates dated January 25th 2025
revised to March 2025 waiver from section 18 of the zoning by bylaw one color of the base 18.6.D.2 d requesting a waiver to use materials lighter in color tint or shade on the
upper floors and materials with darker in color tint or shade on the base the planning board grants a waiver to use materials lighter in color tint or shade on the upper floors and materials with darker in color tint or shade on the
base two building stepback and street enclosure 18.6.e E building stepback requesting a waiver to allow the building to be over 25 ft at the street right ofway line the planning board grants a waiver to allow
31 ft 10 and 1/16th in in height at the street right ofway line with no step back waiver from zoning regulations of the planning board one fourcourt standards table 7.2 2.3 C.3 C 4
standards requesting a waiver to allow the four court to be configured with a wall on one side instead of enclosed walls on three sides the planning board grants a waiver to allow the fourcourt to be configured with a wall on one side special permits one section
18.5D.5.8 parking reduction methods on street parking offset the planning board grants a special permit pursuant to section 18.5 d.5 a of the zoning bylaw parking reduction methods on street parking offset to allow three parking
spaces located along the corresponding lot frontage to meet the minimum parking requirements the following criteria criteria have been considered the supply and demand of public and private parking in the district mobility management programs and services that parking
provided in excess of the minimum requirement does not result in underutilized spaces excessive imperous surfaces two section 8 18.13 design special permits the planning board grants a special permit pursuant to section 18.13 of the zoning bylaw design
special permits and finds that the following criteria have been satisfied for varing from specified requirements associated with the development site and building design set forth in section 18 a consistent with this with the purpose
of section 18 in general b consistent with any special permanent eligibility requirements as indicated elsewhere in this section 18 c social economic or community needs are served by the proposal such as expanding housing
choices d adequate safety of traffic flow access parking and loading are provided e adequate utilities and other public services are provided f positive impacts on pedestrian comfort and safety g potential fiscal impact including
impact on municipal services tax base and employment are positive and H such relief shall not result in substantial detriment to the CBZD or surrounding neighborhoods the variations in design from the design specifications stated in
section 18 are as follows a section 18.7 mixeduse building one build to zone fac to sus to facade buildout minimum is required to be 70% and the applicant proposes
59.5% two street facing wall offset depth minimum is required to be 4 feet and the applicant proposes 2 feet three street facing transparency is required to be a minimum of 60% on the ground floor and the applicant proposes 35.9%
zoning regulations of the planning board the planning board finds the project to be in substantial compliance with section 7 character-based zoning district design standards of the zoning regulations of the planning board conditions of approval the project is
subject to the following conditions one prior to issuance of a building permit this special permit decision shall be recorded at the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds two prior to a demolition permit being granted the applicant must submit a construction phasing and sequencing schedule to be reviewed and
approved by town staff three prior to the issuance of a building permit and pursuant to section 18.11.D D transportation mitigation fee of the Danverse zoning bylaw the applicant and or property owner shall
provide a payment of 41,616 which is the transportation mitigation fee associated with the net new square footage 13,872 square ft times $3 per each square foot of increased net floor area
if the new if the net new square footage is modified the payment amount will also be modified for prior to certificate of occupancy the applicant and or developer shall provide one affordable residential unit based on the number of net new 7
residential units pursuant to section 29 affordable housing provisions of the zoning bylaw the applicant and or developer shall hire a monitoring agent prepare and sign a regulatory agreement that is filed at the registry of deeds and provide a marketing plan to the t
town of Danvers the applicant and or developer shall ensure that one affordable residential unit is added to the state's subsidized housing inventory shi if the number of net new residential units is modified the unit contribution and/or payment amount will
also be amended five prior to certificate of occupancy all public related items including but not limited to the new sidewalks street trees and repaving of portions of High Street must be completed to the sat satisfaction of the town of
Danver's Danver Department of Public Works six cement fiber siding or similar material will be installed on the entire exterior of the building seven vehicles are prohibited from parking in the driveway at all times and shall never
impede driveway access eight the applicant will satisfy all the comments in the Danver's engineering division memorandum dated April 8th 2025 nine if there are any changes to the approved plans the use or the conditions on premises planning staff
will review if deemed a major change by staff the applicant will have to apply for a modification to application to the special permit any approval of these special permits shall lapse within 3 years from the grant thereof if construction has
not begin by such date okay thank you Jean a motion has been made on the special permit is there a second second okay second by Tim okay any further discussion hearing none all in favor
please say I i i any opposed none okay so that's the special permit now we'll move on uh we need to I need to entertain a motion to close the public hearing on the um on the site plan for
61 High Street i make a motion we close the public hearing for site plan on 61 High Street okay second motion's been made uh by Jean second by uh by Mike um any discussion on the motion hearing none
all in favor please say I i i any opposed none right so let's move on to the um uh to site plan review and I ask the Gene is the clerk to to read the motion site plan review 61 High Street
date of application February 11th 2025 date of hearing April 8th 2025 date of decision April 8th 2025 the Danverse planning board finds the site plan submitted by Richard and Stacy Bochelli trustees of 61 High Street Realy Trust
for property at 61 High Street Assessor's Map 51 lot 303 to be in substantial compliance with the criteria and regulations adopted by the town details of the plan review can be found on the following plans 61 High Street site development 61 High Street Danvers
Mass 01923 prepared by Apoint Designs Incorporated dated January 31st 2025 consisting of eight sheets permit site plan 61 High Street Danver Massachusetts 01923 prepared by
Hancock Associates dated January 31st 2025 revised to April 4th 2025 consisting of 11 sheets supporting materials include lighting plan prepared by Echoling Incorporated dated June January 24th 2025 and associated
lighting details sheets stormwater report prepared by Hancock Associates dated January 2025 revised to March 2025 the following submission requirements have been waved one section 4.3.2 site analysis plan the site
analysis plan is entitled this existing site plan there is no note containing the number of all trees with a DBH greater what's DBH um diameter breath height greater than 6 in soil testing locations
and results are shown on the site construction plan C4 and utilities plan C5 wetland boundaries are shown on the site dimensional regulations plan C3 construction plan C4 and utilities plan C5 two section 4.3 dimensional
regulations Plan dimensional regulations plan prepared by registered professional engineer instead of reg registered land surveyor 3 section 4.3.4 site construction plan the dimensions of the driveway is shown on the dimensional regulations plan C3 a table indicating
amounts of earth material that are to be removed added or reused on site in cubic feet is not shown four section 4.3.6 utilities plan the profile of the water sanitary sewer and storm water pipe is not shown on the plan five section 4.3.7 landscape plan
the landscape plan is entitled the hardscape plan L1 and planting plan L2 the existing grades are shown on existing site plan and the proposed grades are shown on site construction plan C4 the existing trees are shown on the existing site plan the yard set back
and table showing the percentage of existing and proposed imperous surface is shown on the dimensional regulations plan C3 six a section 4.3.8 off- streetet parking and loading plan the off- streetet parking and loading plan is entitled the site construction plan
C4 the number location and dimensions of driveway and parking spaces and a parking table is shown on the dimensional regulations plan C3 the construction details and type of material for surface paving is shown on the detail sheet
C6 conditions of approval the project is subject to the following conditions one prior to issuance of a BU building permit this site plan decision shall be recorded at the Southern Essex Registry of Deets two prior to a demolition permit being granted the applicant must submit a construction phasing and
sequencing schedule to be reviewed and approved by town staff three prior to a certificate of occupancy all public related items including but not limited to the new sidewalk street trees and repaving portions of High Street must be completed to the satisfaction of the
town Danver's Department of Public Works four vehicles are prohibited from parking in the driveway at all times and should never impede driveway access five the applicant will satisfy all the comments in the Danvers Engineering Division memorandum dated April 8th 2025
six if there are any changes to the approved plans the use or the conditions on premises planning staff will review if deemed a major change by staff the applicant will have to apply for a new application for site plan review this project is subject to the attached list
of general conditions any approval of this site plan review shall lapse within 3 years from the grant thereof if construction has not be begun by such date okay thank you Jean a motion's been made on the site plan is there a second
second okay second by Tim any discussion on the um uh on the motion okay hearing none all in favor please say I i i any opposed none so thank you very much we appreciate your time tonight good luck thank you
thank you okay and and Josh just as a sort of a postcript here if you can talk with um have those internal discussions and then you know maybe report back to us at a subsequent meeting with respect to the transportation u mitigation fee and pedestrian safety
issues that were brought up tonight yeah absolutely yeah and that's something I think we can talk about it either at a subsequent meeting here or also um I'm sorry we actually still have a meeting going on so um we could actually still discuss
that at the um at a subsequent meeting or even at this more on a systemic basis this might be something that' be worth raising and discussing at an upcoming land use summit i agree okay okay so okay can you repeat all that i missed
I was just saying as a postcript to that I'll watch it on TV no no i think I was just saying as I was being rude that's okay sorry no no problem now I I was saying as a postcript to this I think we're going to have a discussion um uh town staff's going to have a discussion with respect to the transportation
mitigation fee and as it relates to this specific project in terms of any um you know pedestrian safety concerns that sort of thing taking into consideration some of the public comments um you know from Amy Butler as well as Bill Bates as well from his his own personal
experience his crossing guard work and then um then we'll have I'd like you know like staff then to report back to the planning board and maybe on a on a more systemic matter too this also this you know the use of the transportation mitigation fee might be something worth having it as an agenda item for an
upcoming land use summit for sure which I think we're planning on having maybe this coming summer yes so okay so thank you thank you okay um we do have an uh just as an agenda item and this is just for a very brief discussion and I know it's it's kind of uh it's getting a little bit
late is the discussion about outdoor lighting standards um and so this was a this is just we just had this in the agenda just to give a quick you know update we did have the um at town meeting uh at the special town meeting the outdoor lighting standards the that
article which um uh which came through you know sort of the public hearing process it was um the town meeting amended the um made an amendment to refer the matter back to the planning board for review so um so it's back
before us and so I think we just wanted to uh I think what we're looking at doing is is having subsequent um discussions and and taking into take into account some of the feedback we received i know we received some feedback on the floor at town meeting uh
with respect to and I think we've received some written feedback as well about the outdoor lighting standards i think some of the concerns in terms of as it affects you know residential uses and such and you know um and so I think
the next uh so then so the next step I think is this is ultimately I think we're looking at going to our next not this upcoming annual town meeting in May but the the next special town meeting yeah i mean I think um yeah internally
with staff I think the idea is is right i think um it's not in stone but the idea is that we talk internally that February 2026 um we're hoping or we're planning on a special town meeting in that date and
that the outdoor lighting standards um would be one of the zoning amendments that would be hopefully voted on at that town meeting so in terms of process um you know we would have to have a
public hearing um you know in that sort of what we've been doing um the past couple years is kind of having public hearings in that September September October November December time frame you know leading up to the uh the February
town meeting so I think as we speak right now that's I think how we view this this item okay um I'd like to see about having discussions sooner than later so that we can you know air if there's any comments or concerns i think they can I'd rather get it you know
sooner than later and if people are watching as well I mean the the outdoor lighting stand I mean the outdoor lighting standards I think they're still on the town website with respect to the from the last you know um you know from the from the special town meeting sure so if people have comments or uh you
know questions about it then they can definitely Yep you could feel you could give me feel free to give me a call or um or email me um my contact information is on the town website um be would be happy to talk to anyone from the public who has any questions or comments about
um the the draft language of the you know the outdoor lighting standard so but we would have again full you know like public hearings prior to yeah in the fall but I'm saying even like today or in the next couple weeks or months leading up to the fall okay you know I'd be happy to you know happy to discuss it
with anyone who reaches out so okay and then we'll it looks like we'll also have um and and again you know it looks like I think you know from town staff it looks like we're we're planning on having another um land use summit probably sometime this summer yeah that's what we're I think yes I think
once I think Yeah um with a new time manager on board i think we were trying to just wait for that to happen and then so um the idea is right we would we would try and do one um later in the summer yeah I would like it done you know sooner than later just so that we can
also address some of the any of these items that come up because before we know it uh you know special town meeting will be up be here before we know it it does uh yeah time does creep up on us so okay sounds good um so our um anything
else by other members our next meeting is the 20 April 22nd um Jean you mentioned that you will not be attending which is fine or maybe virtual but let's just let's just say no right sure and
then you were virtual i'll be I I will be attending uh virtually for this meeting i I'll be able to participate virtually and then um is that school vacation week yeah yep that's school vacation week you'll be coming for either of you folks tim or Mike i'll be here you don't want to be with the kids
they'll be there all week i'm here you'll be in attendance okay um Jim I believe um it's after taxes so he might be a little freer but uh can't speak for him but I he'll likely be attendance um what do we anticipate
having on the um Yeah so the trash lane item the first item tonight that was continued Um there's a special permit application for indoor indoor pickle ball at the former bed and bath beyond indoor pickle
ball at the former Bed Bath and Beyond okay and then um a discussion item not a public hearing but just a discussion item about the uh the citizen the three citizens petitions yes for the annual town meeting that are related to planning and
zoning yeah there there were three um three citizens petition I think they were discussed at the last select board meeting oh yeah uh dealing with the not to get into it but like dealing with the um you know potential study of the MBTA
zoning and Yep okay so those are the three um items for our April 2022nd um those are the only the so the application Mhm well the two applications is the trust lane and the
the pickle the pickle ball we don't have any as we speak there are no other um planning board applications you know for future meetings and so and just so and so the the the indoor pickle ball at the former Bed Bath and Beyond is that a special permit site plan review not say
plan review but just a special permit for the use because it's like indoor indoor indoor entertainment facil is like four words it's like entertainment sports inside indoor type so it just in commercial
three that type of use just requires a special permit okay yep got it mhm okay very good thank you anything else from fellow members okay uh hearing none I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn make a
motion we adjurnn okay second motion is made and seconded by Mike any discussion all in favor please say I i any opposed none okay have a good night thank you no problem