Good evening.

I would like to call the December 9th, 2025 meeting of the planning board to order.

Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States.

My name is Joe Fioli serving as chairman tonight.

Members sitting for the planning board tonight.

Uh to my right, Jim Harvey.

Good evening, sir.

Bianca Carlson.

Good evening, Salem.

And to my left, Town Councillor Jeff Hatch.

Good evening.

And Damian Norcross.

Good evening.

Last meeting of the year.

Yeah, and the with us from the planning department, we have Jacob Lafontaine.

Uh as planning director, agenda for tonight is as follows.

We have four items of new business.

First is the auto zone site plan.

It's a public hearing for 6,800 square foot retail building at 42 North Broadway.

Sarage Realty LLC site plan.

It's a public hearing for amended site plan and phasing scheduled for a 6,000 square foot office space, vehicle maintenance and dry ice manufacturing building and a 20,000 square foot warehouse storage building.

Um at 44 Pelham Road.

Uh Rockingham Christian Church site plan uh number three on the new business.

It's public hearing for revised site plan, uh, adding 150 seats with the conditional use permit for reduced parking at 2K Key Way to Drive and Salem NIM site plan.

That's a public hearing for change of views for 19,600 square foot restaurant and entertainment use with a conditional use permit for reduced parking and additional signage at 11 Mall Road.

Um withdrawals tonight?

Uh Mr.

Chair, the second item of new business, Saraj Realty LLC has requested uh withdrawal and to be moved to the January 13th, 2026 meeting.

The um applicant still needs to go to the zoning board of adjustment, which will be heard uh Thursday due to the weather storm last Tuesday.

Uh thank you.

Let it be known for the record that uh Chuck Sabah is sitting.

Um point of order really quick.

Is that actually a continuance or is that a withdrawal?

We would re-notify abutters, I think in this instance, uh, because the application we notify four meetings, and it was originally notified for our first meeting in November, but they've since exceeded that.

So I don't think the board needs to continue the application.

I think we would just have the uh uh the applicant re-notify the abutters.

Okay, thank you.

Um we have three minutes, three items of minutes for tonight.

Um chair, I move to accept the minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of October 28th, 2025 as written.

Second motion and second to accept the October 28th, 2025 meeting minutes.

All those in favor nice unanimous.

Ms.

Chair, I make a motion to accept the minutes of the planning board meeting on November 13th, 2025 as written.

Motion and second to accept the November 13th, 2025 meeting maybe minutes of the planning board.

Um discussion.

Abstaining.

Okay, that was 40.

And finally, Mr.

Chair, I make a motion to accept or to approve the minutes of the planning board meeting of November 25th, 2025 as written.

Second.

Motion of second to accept the November 25th, 2025 meeting minutes from the planning board meeting.

Um all in favor.

It's uh four abstaining, one abstention, four zero zero.

Thank you.

All right.

With that, we'll go to the first item of uh new business.

It's the auto zone site plan public hearing for 6800 square foot retail building at 42 North Broadway.

Is the plan complete?

Yes, Mr.

Chair.

The plan is complete.

Mr.

Chair, I move to accept the plan as complete.

Second.

Motion is second to accept the auto zone uh site plan as complete.

All those in favor.

That's unanimous.

Reading of the abutters, please.

The abutters are as follows.

If you're here, please indicate by saying so.

They are La Poli, 34 North Broadway of Salem LLC, Trickett Realty, Clambert, Fraser, LaFrance Revocable Trust, Ariolo is present, and that is all right.

Sorry, what was that again?

I didn't go in the left broadway.

34 North Broadway of Salem LLC is also present.

Thank you.

Applicant to present the plan.

Good evening, Chairman, members of the board.

It's uh nice to be back.

I think it was here for the conceptual design.

My name is John Rowls from Novis.

We did the site civil design for the 42 North Broadway sale motto zone.

Um we go to the next slide.

Uh so uh as we mentioned, we're um we're looking to propose uh a new auto zone building, 6800 square feet with parking, drainage, sewer, and utilities.

Um as most of you know, there's a um moratorium on the street, so that kind of limited what we can do for from an access standpoint.

But I figured since we've already gone through some of these, we'll go through the plans and address some of the comments that had previously come up in the last hearing.

Um so on the site plan here.

Um some of the few things that that were added again.

You can see the it's kind of hard to see, but it's the our buildings on the right accesses to the left, the rear has the loading area.

The truck movements have been um you know uh done, so we had to um have painted lines and no island on the rear part of the space.

There's a turnaround spot for trucks.

We added an additional island for landscaping and and potential um snow storage.

Um one of the big items that came from um a few of the comments was the access way from the street.

We have an access way and a ramp coming from the street to the front door area that was asked for in a previous um comment from View Shed.

The other item that we have had added previous was the uh as part of the depot village district.

Um they want to promote pedestrian access, so we actually did end up adding that um that bench in the front of the parcel there.

One of the things that was brought up for the bench was they didn't want to promote people working on their cars from that, so we put it as far away from the kind of parking area as possible so people wouldn't work on their car in the parking lot.

We weren't gonna allow that anyway, but you know, some people you know it can sometimes do that.

So I think that kind of meets both kind of um issues that they had uh for the site.

Um you know we again the parking was amended, but we are we do have um more than the required parking on site.

There's a few extra spaces.

There's also an access way to the left.

One of the previous items that was borrowed from the conceptual design hearing was um there was a there was some kind of unformal agreement from the previous owner um to each of the business on either side.

At the time I didn't have the information, but now I do auto zone.

We're just gonna be leasing the parcel.

So autozone is gonna be willing to work with the owner.

So if they want to provide that, let them have parking, we're willing to work with them on that.

So, you know, what whatever they do or whatever um agreement that they had, we're willing to work with them.

But so that takes, you know, I guess our you know, our speed bump, I guess, or our issue off the table.

So, you know, what whatever they want to do, we're willing to work with them.

Um other items that you probably saw in the view shed comments were um the wall design and some of the textures and facings on that.

So, you know, we were using uh a ready rock wall was anticipated, and we provided some facings and colorings to view shed, but either of these the colors and the facings can be changed at the discretions, you know, through you know, through the towns or regulations.

We had selected, I think, two that worked for view shed.

I think it was the um cobblestone and the gray wall facing seem to be a nice touch.

Um and that's you know satisfy the comments for for those we believe.

You want to go to the next slide.

So this is the grading and drainage plan.

Uh overall, we're gonna be decreasing total impervious on site, which is gonna improve uh stormwater runoff.

We're providing a um subsurface infiltration system.

Um the crew treatment we're gonna have deep sump catch basin and an isolator row, and um we're gonna infiltrate the stormwater on site from the water quality volume.

Again, we're decreasing impervious, so the total amount of stormwater coming off this site is gonna be less than before.

And since not all paved, it's gonna effectively be cleaner in addition to what we're doing.

So we're tying into that and into the front.

Um so overall it's a stormwater improvement.

We have some roof drains coming off the back of the building that go around the building into the um subsurface detention system.

Um and then we're also providing ADA access, you know, with one and a half or up to two percent cross slopes and less than four and a half percent running slopes to the front of the building.

Uh I'm gonna go to the next slide.

Um this is the utility plan that shows some of the drainage aspects.

The most of the utility connections are coming from the rear.

As I mentioned, there's a moratorium on the street, so we can't soft cut the street for our connections.

So we worked with the town GPW to locate the stubs that were remaining from the previous site, and we're just gonna connect into those to make it easy and simple.

Um that's fine.

The the it's hard to see, but the the water runs to the left of the building, the sewer sewers in the back, and just ties into the existing stubs on site.

Uh this is just the the access way profile for the utilities.

As you can see, we're not having issues with uh um crossings, but it does show the slope difference.

The existing slopes 10% up the street, and since the depot district requires you to put your building into the front, that has to level out that whole area, which is you know definitely a um definitely an obstacle that would that we had to overcome, but I think we made it worth working together with with Jacob on this one.

Uh next slide.

So these are just the real details.

We can um kind of skip to the landscaping plan.

Um one of the view shed uh well, we can stop here, I guess.

Do you want to stop you out?

View shed did ask for uh ready rock detail that we addressed.

So we we have added and kind of moved around some details to satisfy their requirements, um, but that on the right detail is uh ready walk ready rock wall detail.

Um moving on to landscaping.

Um sorry, sorry Jacob.

So there's a few other details that they requested the the uh a guard rail, some of the ADA access on the street for um the the ramp, the sidewalk ramps, the a fence on the top of the wall, and uh the bench that we we got directly from one of the recommendations from I think it was a honey well, we just used their their detail for that front bench.

So one of the issue one of the items that View Shed had is because of the slopes of the wall, and just uh uh to go over it again.

Uh the existing wall there is is a field stone wall that's kind of falling apart.

So we we knew we were gonna have to replace that anyways.

So we're providing a ready walk wall again.

We're leveling out the area, which is increasing the wall height.

Um one of the issues that they that that view shed has providing trees in a large slope.

So we're just actually gonna remove those trees on the top of the wall.

There still remains north of 15 feet separation between the existing um our existing um tree line and the edge of the uh of the fence.

So there's there's gonna be wooded area um for that anyway, remaining.

So if there was ever a screening or sound issue, the 15 feet of woods are gonna remain there in that in that in that case.

Now, would you mind going back to the side plan?

Sorry, Jacob.

One other thing I wanted to uh point out was uh how the wall will be built is gonna be means and methods from the contractor.

So whether or not they're gonna use sheet powers or shoring, that's gonna dictate how what that line would be.

So we we have um uh a worse scenario on how the slope will be behind the wall.

So just to kind of show you that we're we're keeping and maintaining as much trees as possible, and that was a note that actually view shed asked us to add to keep and maintain as much trees as possible on the top in the right.

Uh so we can go back to uh take the architectural elevations.

I think it was next.

So it's considerably different than what we came to you before.

Um we we worked with with Jacob and ViewShed to kind of really change the design of this building considerably.

So one of the big ones was the facade, the reflective surfaces, facade on the front.

We only had a few windows in the front, but the depot district requires 60%.

We're exceeding that now for the all the windows in the front.

So we have some fox windows on the front.

Uh another big one was having any kind of angled roof pieces.

We over the entryway, we have the um uh an angled roof to kind of fit in with that depot district um design that we modified.

The last big item was the uh the colors, and so they really were auto zone's branding is red, orange, large stripes, you know, with so that was all removed from this, you know, in just into working with the town and the depot district.

Um as you can see, like in this the second item on the we have very large orange and red stripes and white stripes coming across that.

Now it's a more you know thinning color that fits with the depot district, you know, requirements.

We even added some um uh reflective surfaces on the west side, which is the bottom, you know, just to provide a little bit more um you know, entry space that would be more inviting for customers to come in because that's the side they'll be parking on.

I think that was the last sheet, Sean.

So I think that yeah, I think that's it.

Yeah.

Any questions or comments?

We'll uh hear from the planning department and then uh get to some comments from the board.

Thanks.

Just give me one second to open up.

Uh it's on here.

Sorry, Mr.

Chair.

Look like the might have to put this computer on.

Go to public comment.

Yeah.

That's a good okay.

Um any members of the public like to speak on the plan.

Name and address for the record, please.

Albert Raymond, 28 Cove Road, Salem, New Hampshire.

I would like to thank you for our serve your service to the town.

Like I said, my name's Albert Raymond.

My wife and I own 34 North Broadway of Salem, LLC, and also Declorus Christian Books and Gifts.

Years ago, I served on the town's 208 water quality study committee commission, and also completed two terms on the Salem Conservation Commission.

So I care deeply about how our town develops.

We have been Salem residents for 44 years.

We have owned Decalorus for 32 years.

Before the current Auto Zone proposal, the Patel project planned to build on the upper lot where the former VFW building stood.

Under that plan, parking arrangements for Declorus bookstore and Dr.

James Ferriola's dental practice would have remained unchanged.

For more than 50 years, customer parking has been allowed there through a long-standing verbal and rental agreement.

Even the police department, utility crews, mailman, construction companies working on Route 28 have relied on that parking area because there is no municipal parking in that area.

Then, surprise, the plan changed.

The town now wants AutoZone to be the first to follow the depot overlay district plan, placing the new building closer to Route 28.

That change would eliminate our customer parking for everyone, creating a serious hardship for two long established businesses, and potentially forcing us to close our stores.

Is it worth it?

Closing two long-term local businesses.

Okay.

I also have several practical concerns.

Number one, construction impact.

Heavy equipment, driving on the property, digging, pounding, vibrations near my concrete slab, block wall building, could cause cracking or damage.

Inside we have fragile inventory, glass shelves, gifts, figurines, and statues, and so forth.

Who will be responsible for any damage caused by construction activity that's so close to my building?

Number two, drainage on the proposed south side of the property near the declorous sign.

The catch basin sits too high in water pools during and after storms.

Will that problem be corrected?

It's will be on the Patel property.

It will be on the Patel property and the catch basin lowered as part of the project.

That's a question.

The town did acknowledge that the catch basin was too high.

The engineer said they will leave it up to the developer.

Number three, cleanup and maintenance.

The back side of the proposed auto zone lot behind my building contains debris, concrete blocks, down trees, branches, and many beer bottles that were thrown aside from the VFW.

That area needs to be cleaned up and maintained properly.

Number four.

Declores Christian Books and Gifts is a destination specialty shop.

During Christmas, Easter, and first communion seasons, customers come from all over.

Without parking, where will they go?

Will they park in auto zone and risk being towed?

This creates confusion and a public safety issue for drivers and pedestrians alike.

I wish there were some pedestrians.

Route 28 is dangerous.

Finally, I want to stress a broader point.

There is no municipal parking in this area.

The land beside and behind the chamber of commerce could have been developed for that purpose.

If you look at it, it's landscaped.

It could have been parking.

Instead, it was landscaped.

Without sufficient parking, the depot village concept cannot succeed because this part of the town is not pedestrian friendly.

Isn't it all about being pedestrian friendly?

And one last concern.

What are the plans for battery and oil storage and spill precautions?

Oil and antifreeze.

Brake fluid.

I'll add this on my own too.

That people will be changing batteries, will be changing their oil and fluids on auto zone's property.

I don't care what they say is going to be happening because it happens everywhere else.

How will a town ensure proper containment and cleanup?

Look up on your phone, auto zone fires in the U.S.

On your phones, if you look that up, you'll find multiple auto zone stores in the U.S.

have significantly damaged or destroyed by fires with several major incidents reported in recent years involving batteries, motor oil, brake fluid.

I call on the Salem Fire Department to review the plans on storage of these hazards and procedures.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

I'm not against development, but it must be balanced, responsible, and fair to the existing small businesses that have served the town for decades.

One more thing.

Auto zone would be safer if it was built up top where the VFW was.

That way, if there was a fire, other buildings would not be involved because it would be isolated.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Raymond.

Well, um, we'll have the advocate and uh planning director address some of your concerns on the construction and drainage and cleanup and whatnot.

Do you want to go through your staff comments?

Is anyone else like to speak on the plan from the public?

Is any anyone else like to speak on the plan from the public James Ferriolo 48 North Broadway on the proposed on the building to the left of the proposed building here?

Um Mr.

Raymond pretty much covered most of the things that I was also uh one to know, but I need some clarification on one thing.

Village district overlay plan specifically said that buildings were to be built located close to the streets, retail below, apartments above.

Has this been changed?

Or is this still in existence?

The depot village overly does anticipate and allow mixed use development, but it doesn't require mixed use development, so it allows retail uses uh such as this application, so we wouldn't compel them to add a residential component, but if auto zone wanted to, they would be able to and there was another ordinance that was put forth that um said that any new construction in this area, there had to be a 20-foot buffer zone on bald sides, and that's what I'd like to know if this does not conform to that, especially on Mr.

Raymond's side.

So I'm not familiar with the setback you were referring to.

You might be referring to the setback in the underlying district.

I mean, but in the I was on that committee for the village district overlay way back when the overlay district was adopted in 2009, it was adopted without setbacks.

So setbacks are waived by the the planning board.

The underlying district, which is commercial industrial B, I believe, does have a 20-foot setback.

Fire apparatus has to be able to get around three sides of these buildings.

So it certainly can't on Mr.

Raymond's side.

So those are some of the concerns that I have along with what Mr.

Raymond has also said.

So I do my think my wife uh would also like to say something about the uh pedestrian-friendly situation that want to get in this area.

Uh Mr.

Ferrari, the the fire department will review it if they haven't already reviewed it.

That's correct.

Yeah, yeah.

We'll add a condition on there as well that they have to review it.

Good evening, gentlemen.

Diane Ferriolo, 48 North Broadway, and also 36 Dustin here in Salem.

I have two comments.

One of which is the voters in in the town in March voted to have the sites.

What they're there their concepts for Salem of the Future.

And at that time it was to promote recreational and walking in this area.

That was one of those very clear mentions for the district for the for the Salem Depot District.

In putting in an auto zone with the traffic coming, you have to cross you'll you'll be having pedestrians crossing that area, which will be hazardous.

And that was my concern is who is who is the responsible party to oversee Salem of the future?

Do we want to keep all of our commercial area say south of Main Street?

The vision was to keep start having recreational activities towards the northern portion of town where we have the rail trail in the uh veterans new the new veterans uh memorial section already by the rail trail.

You know, how it how does this project fit into Salem of the future?

My other question is in the siding of the auto zone, one corner of that building is extremely close to the lot line to Mr.

Raymond's.

And in addition, the landscaping plan calls for I believe three trees in that area as well.

How does that allow Mr.

Raymond access to his property as he has a right to?

If he has maintenance that has to be done, if he has God forbid something should happen.

How should a fire apparatus get near there to take care of his building?

You know, the it seems to me that this siding it he's the gentleman from AutoZone said, well, there's no minimum setback in that area.

Well, if you go up and down 28, there is no building that is that close to another building, whether it's South Broadway or North Broadway.

This building to me seems like it's extremely close to Mr.

Raymond.

And that's is that fair to an existing build, you know, property owner that's been here for years to have access to his building all of a sudden taken away from him.

And also that his signage, which has been there for years, is completely oblivious.

Part of his brand is eliminated because you know because auto zone is so close that you can't see it anymore.

And those were my only comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll um hear from the planning department staff comments and then uh we'll get to uh we'll have the applicant address some of the the um citizens' comments and concerns and uh we'll have the board address those as well.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Sorry about the technical difficulties earlier.

So the proposal here is for a 9600 square foot retail uh sorry uh uh retail building, 6600 square feet.

That's an holdover from a previous action you made, my apologies.

Um so back in April of 2022, you did approve a restaurant and retail business.

That approval has since expired.

You heard this conceptually uh back in April of this year, and they are coming under the depot village overlay district.

You can see from the uh site plan that it is split zoned.

There's three different districts here.

This is the residential district to the rear of the site, commercial industrial B uh to the north, and then Commercial Industrial A, which is a small district that encapsulates the depot, uh the uh direct depot, pretty much 28 and in Main Street.

Um so again, you you heard this previously.

There was a lot of discussion on the design of the of the building, a lot of discussion on the um uh landscape, and they've done a lot of great things to adhere to the requirements of the depot village overlay district.

For instance, they have um provided a significant buffer uh from the street.

This is a vegetative buffer, so once we go to the landscape plan, you'll see that this is uh, you know, the parking is set back from the street and it is obscured from the street with dense vegetation.

Uh they've provided pedestrian connections from the existing sidewalk.

Uh they've also added a crosswalk across the entryway, and they've provided a in uh a pedestrian connection to the adjacent parcel to the north.

Um the uh butters did talk quite a bit about the parking concerns, obviously.

Uh they are overparked per the ordinance.

The ordinance requires 25 spaces based off of the retail use, and they're providing 27 spaces.

Um so I would I just would note that the design consultant requested some additional details.

So one of the details here is the bench.

So the uh again, the depot village overlay requires pedestrian amenities.

We've seen that at um uh depot in Maine, which is another project that was approved under the Depot Village Overlay in at that time.

You required uh them to install benches, and there's a handful of benches along the uh the right-of-way.

Uh uh design consultant also wanted a detail of the fence that will be at the top of the retaining wall, a very large retaining wall.

So there was a lot of discussion in the uh view sheds correspondence regarding the retaining wall and what it ultimately will look like.

Uh and we'll look at that in a second.

Um again, they are providing uh tip downs here, uh ADA compliant tip downs, and then also a handrail that will uh because there's a slope up to the site.

So these were the details they provided of the ready rock.

Reason being because it kind of mimics the uh the improvements that the uh DPW just did at Veterans Plaza, which is a granite wall.

Um, you know, probably not reasonable to have them build you know 15 foot or more retaining wall of granite, but uh maybe something that can mimic that and kind of establish a sense of place in the depot village.

These were the elevations that were initially provided in March.

Um, and we'll see you've already seen the uh the new elevations, a substantial improvement.

This was the uh facade that faces 28.

So it really kind of at that time turned its back on 28.

It wasn't really front facing.

This is the uh side to the north, and then this was an interim condition that they provided.

Uh, and then this was ultimately where we went, and then uh Mr.

Ralphs has shown the final iteration uh which has some different uh changes in terms of the color palette.

Uh one thing I did want to discuss is the south facade.

So you'll note that in this iteration, they began to enhance it with these onens.

The onens are a little awkward because you know, generally an on uh provides cover for either an entrance or a window, and in discussion with the applicant, the onens were ultimately uh removed because they you know didn't have uh really a functional purpose.

But they were uh the windows were retained in the on ins as well on the uh eastern facing or sorry, western facing facade, and then also the northern facing facade.

And you can see that the the entrance was oriented towards the street.

They're gonna have two entrances, one on uh the street and then one to the internal parking lot.

But I would just ask you to consider whether or not you think any enhancement is needed to this facade.

Right now, um, as as we've heard the abutters note, the side of that building is obstructed by the building to the south.

So very limited visibility.

You can see that from uh this.

So if you're northbound traffic, you're not really seeing much of that facade.

But if this site were ever to be developed or redeveloped, uh it could potentially expose that.

So I would just ask you to give some consideration.

At the last meeting, we did ask the applicant to enhance this area with landscaping, so there will be some vegetation in that area which will provide some screening of the building.

So I would just ask again for you to consider whether or not you know this facade is sufficient given the landscape and that'll be added.

Uh also went up to uh Howard Street because I wanted to note that one of the comments from our design consultant and town staff were that we wanted a uh limits of uh vegetation.

There's an existing vegetative kind of buffer between Howard Street and in this parcel, and obviously they're gonna encroach on that to some degree, but we wanted to ensure that it was as minimal as possible because we didn't want to necessarily open up uh Howard Street entirely to the development.

Obviously, uh you know, in December, it's not much of a screen, probably looks better when there's tree cover.

Um but aside from that, I think they've done a great job in terms of addressing the outside design consultants' comments, enhancing the architectural elevations and meeting the spirit of the depot uh village district.

Uh, you did hear from the abutters and the abutters did acknowledge that uh we adopted a master plan, you adopted a master plan back in April, and we did envision this being a mixed-use area, but it doesn't require that component.

It kind of allows the developer to do so, but doesn't say you can't do retail unless you do um through mixed-use development.

So I think that's kind of the direction the town would like to see this uh this area developed in, but again, uh you couldn't you can comply with the overlay district without requiring a residential component.

Um so again, they they are uh they are overparked per the depot village overlay, they require 27 spaces.

Sorry, they're required 25 spaces providing 27.

They're okay in lock coverage and build and height.

Um their landscape and plan has been has been revised.

There are some uh outstanding items that you know if if you've been following view sheds comments back and forth.

Uh the applicant's been working hard to address those, but there are some outstanding items.

It's a little uh uh atypical, but I think the uh in terms of the scope, I guess, of the the outstanding items.

I think they're probably things that could be uh conditioned if the board is is favorable uh on the application.

Most of them are pertain to the retaining wall.

So the uh design consultant noted that the selected wall materials finished color and typical block dimension should be provided for review and approval.

I think in talking with the applicant, he said, well, we're not really at that stage of development when we get closer.

We'll do uh design it and we could have it returned back to the design consultant and this board for approval.

Same with uh some of the comments on the uh slat material color and uh frame finish of the bench.

That's something I think that we can work with the applicant on.

Uh public sidewalks, it talks about the planner board may wish to include the final color finish sections and the metal uh handrail is a condition of approval.

So I think all these are all things that are probably not of the level where uh you couldn't act on the plan tonight.

I think they could be conditioned in and I did discuss that with the applicant.

The applicant it was agreeable to that.

Uh one thing that I do note is that they provided some sign details uh in the application, and uh our design consultant and town staff had some concerns with those.

The applicant has acknowledged that the sign will be permitted under kind of a separate approval.

If they need a conditional use permit, they'd come back to you formally.

If uh it's something that uh does not need a conditional use permit, then we would still bring it back to you for your final approval of the design.

Um I did receive a sign permit, I think yesterday that was reflective of the site plan, but my assumption is that that was maybe a miscommunication and that we'd work through that with the applicant.

Uh I would require uh I would suggest that be a requirement of the approval if you were to uh act favorably here.

Aside from that, they did receive outside engineering review.

I would just acknowledge that from RCCD.

And we did receive a letter from NHGOT.

Uh this was received on November 21st, and it says uh further request below NHDOT Bureau of Planning and Community Assistance has reviewed the GPI trip generation letter dated October 21st, 2025, and agrees that the proposed auto zone is a low traffic generator that can be accommodated with the proposed consolidated driveway as shown on the site plan, and that no additional traffic analysis is necessary.

NHGOT has no comments on the site plan or stormwater management plan prepared by NOBIS.

And that was submitted by Nick uh Sanders, who's uh PE with NHGOT.

Um so I I guess that's what I I'd like to share with you.

Uh one of the big outstanding items would be that uh Southerly facade and whether or not you have any uh concerns with with that.

Thank you.

Uh to the board colors, concerns, questions from the board, I think.

Mr.

Hatch.

Okay, also I have a few, so bear with me, please.

Uh applicant.

Do you want them to address the um abutters first?

Yeah, thank you.

That sounds good.

Yeah, you could maybe just for the record address some of the um about his concerns on the construction and maintenance items, construction and maintenance items.

Yeah, yep.

Again, John Ralph's nobus um representing the applicant.

I think um some of these I heard from the conceptual design review, and I think a few of them even stem from the regulations that we were required to follow from the village depot district.

I think at least the first few.

Um the building in the back, you know, was what the previous VFW, and I think that's what we kind of envisioned also made it would make this this construction a lot cheaper.

But as part of the requirements set for the village depot from 2007, that was voted on and approved on years ago.

We're just following those rules to put in the front.

So our hands are tied, and you know, we're working with the town to address those.

Um the drainage is an again with decreasing impervious and have you know multiple catch basins on the lower end.

I think he's referencing the catch basin prior to the L that on the left side of the south and the landscape area, but that tributary area used to be a large section of the parking lot because it was just all paved parking.

So the tributary has been significantly decreased, and we're holding back stonewater on the site.

So stormwater, I think we went above and beyond.

So from a peak flow and a stormwater quality standpoint, where you know, let's say doing you know doing what we need to, I suppose.

Uh, again, there's gonna be less dirty water on site, less total volume water on site, and these also have been reviewed by the RCCD from the Stallmore comments, and we've addressed all those items.

Um parking, which is one of the big ones, and that was again a like you know, a conversation and a deal that they had with the previous owner.

And like I said, you know, we're gonna be leasing this parcel, so we're willing to work with the previous owner on whatever deal that they had made with each of the abutters for the parking.

Now, you know, I I I understand that you know, on the right side process in particular, you know, his parking that usually right up against his building is no longer there, but again, we followed the village depot district of putting that building there.

So that you know that that is kind of is what it is on it.

Um, some of the other items um there's an operation and maintenance plan that goes with that as part of the stormwater point that's required for the New Hampshire stormwater standards.

So, you know, for instance, the catch basins have to be inspected, you know, quarterly and yearly, they have to be backed out, etc.

Along with the operation and maintenance items, they'll go for the subsurface infiltration basin.

Um again, there's an isolator row, so a VAC truck will have to come there uh once a year to do that, and that the uh auto zone will be required to keep and maintain those, you know, per the per the plan that we provided.

So the last item is you know, we can't what I what um services that are provide again.

This is this isn't really a retail store only.

There are there are I guess I would consider minor service oil chains cannot happen in this parking lot that do provide a battery check where they walk out and connect your battery or connect your computer to see what you might need, but there should be no like service-based item that a high likelihood of spills.

Um they do recycle batteries, which I think you guys would think is a positive from a violent standpoint, rather than people just throwing them away.

Um, you know, those batteries are gonna be in a secure room and and and and the floor drain, and now it cannot be connected to the sewer because it has to go through the required um quality controls.

The last item I think was construction.

Um, you know, the con obviously this is this is for the construction, but the construction of the the general GC has to follow the the CGP requirements.

So he has to maintain and operate a clean and an operational site, and you know, have to have its its um you know lighting site and you know perimeter construction fences as required at construction entrance.

We actually do show that actually on the um erosion control plan.

So um I think you know, although those are part of the I guess means and methods for the contractor, you know, we we are you know having them follow the general standard for those items.

Thank you for that.

Uh Mr.

Hatch to your questions.

Okay, yeah.

Oh, don't go though, don't run away.

Um yeah, I too was concerned about the uh the the two catch basins very familiar with this area, he's the father's parking lot.

So and they and they are right, that all that water does collect down, you know, by the street side and one of the catch basins, at least one of them is too high.

But they both they both clogged up.

So I my concern is the one by the bookstore.

Um because that one there actually, if that one overflows it prevents anybody from going to the store.

Um the way this is designed.

So I if you're saying you're gonna take care of it, the town engineer is gonna look at it, and if it's not done right, you'll be digging it back up, I guess.

Um parking.

I have a quick item if you want to just let me have it.

So in the existing condition, all the water from this almost entire parcel hits goes around here and goes down there.

That that will no longer happen.

Most of the water is gonna be collected in catch basins in our area from my drainage system and go into a subsurface tank that's kept and isolated on our site.

So that that amount of water will not be added to the water at the bottom.

So we're improving this stormwater situation significantly on our site.

Yeah, but it's not only the water you need to worry about, it's the snow left behind the plows that'll be plowing Route 28 will end up on this sidewalk.

So I mean, that's how how much snow that's gets up pushed up onto this property.

I used to have to dig out that catch basin there all the time because of the snow from the street, not the snow and the water from the parking lot.

So just be aware of that when you're doing your drainage plan.

Um you covered the hazmat storage.

Uh I want to talk a little bit about construction damage to the abutters.

I advise you that what I would do is treat it almost like a blasting situation.

This would protect you and protect the abutters.

Send an inspector over there, take pictures of the foundations, take pictures of the walls, take picture of whatever's on the side of those buildings, because they're gonna be coming after you of something, you know.

Those that goes down there and start clearing material, whatever, or an excavated building shakes.

The parking thing.

The parking's the big problem here.

All right, because I know they've been parking in that parking lot for 50 years, and unbeknownst to me for some reason.

No, it was a written agreement, whether it was a handshake agreement.

No one ever went and got an easement from the VFW, which is the biggest problem.

So it's nothing that we can enforce or force you to do.

I hate to tell you that legally we can't do anything about it.

I wish you'd had approached it.

I mean, it wasn't a uh a secret that the BFW was gonna close.

They've been trying to sell the building for a long time before they sold it.

I just wish you'd gone ahead and got an easement from them and that would have solved this problem.

So I'm gonna ask you to find out what parking they are requiring.

I think they said that lease is the leasing site.

Yeah.

So in the So AutoZone is just leasing, so any again, we're willing to work with with the owner and the abutters to whatever agreement they want to make to allow some parking on site would be fine.

So I I I just don't know if there's any thing that we can do.

I'm just letting it's really for you.

Our hands are tied, we really can't do anything legally to force them to do anything.

Yeah.

And I would I'd if you don't mind it, I would also recommend, and I know it's not required, but to add like where on this plan here, like with a number 14 continent parking spaces.

This here.

Uh uh right there.

If you could put one or two more handicapped spots in that spot because that's where the dentist people park when they go to there.

And that way they're not just I know it's probably more than what's required for this, but it would give somebody if you can do it.

If you can't, I can't make you do it.

Honestly, I I would do it if it would help, but I don't think it will.

Remember, there's the grade, you have to look at the grades and where the wall is.

So even if you have an ADA parking spot there, there's no ADA access because to get there.

Not flat enough, huh?

Exactly.

So it cannot be more than five percent running slope, two and a half per two percent cross slope.

So and and the access to that is a again, another good we're doing a lot of good faith items in this since we've come back from conceptual, adding the access to the left.

Steps are not in an accessible way.

If you're in a wheelchair, you can't get over there.

So you're gonna be stuck anyway.

Again, that those are those were good faith items that I I understand that that might help, but that won't be functional by adding ADA spaces there.

I'm trying here.

And again, we're willing to work with you too.

I just you know I'm just trying to do the things that make sense.

I do like the for um the new the facade and the p the new uh the look.

I think that looks great.

Um as to the abutters um comment about the municipal lot, there is a municipal lot right across the street from the old Tuscan restaurant or the old it's not the one that's fenced in, the one that doesn't have a fence around it with the old Rocky Ham hotel is that is a municipal parking lot there.

That's all I got.

Thank you, Mr.

Hatch.

Mr.

Saber.

Yes, most of the questions.

Uh so the catch basin, you are gonna do corrections, or you are going to try to do corrections where where we was at, I was getting a little confused.

So again, the catch-basin that they're referring to, it it is going to receive effectively no stormwater.

It's because we have the curb on the above side and at the cast basin on the left, above it and below.

That's also a small landscape area in that area.

So that's gonna be, you know, the landscape area is gonna have the you know, trees and bushes that are gonna contain that area, but there's no runoff going to that area.

The runoff on our site will be will stay contained within the curb line, which then will be captured by the catch basins on site.

And then we'll not even see, you know, on a typical storm, the municipal system.

Because all that water is gonna, you know, again, fall onto our impervious area, go into catch basins and and sit in the subsurface detention system.

It's actually a subsurface infiltration system.

So within a seventy-two hour period, that water will infiltrate into the soil.

And and also the the VFW had an agreement or quasi agreement to hand whatever the hell it was, uh allowing uh people to park there to go to these other uh retail and dentists, etc.

Yeah, so um what was was brought up at the last hearing and after some additional research and talking with the town, there was it was never officialized, so it's not into law, no agreement, no easement.

So and you know, and again, I I'm I'm I'm a resident of this area too.

I I understand I you know I'm just trying to follow the rules and regulations set forth.

So the owner of the property, are they gonna be willing to to continue that relationship?

The owner of the property are we willing to continue a relationship with the town with with each abutter, and we're willing to let that happen.

Okay.

And that was a question that I didn't have the answer for last time, if if you remember that that like you know, we talked to auto zone and auto on top of them with but that's at the discretion and coordination with each of the abutters and the owner, which then you know moves it kind of away from a site plan approval item as you know the gentleman to your left, you know, mentioned.

Okay.

Mr.

Milcross.

Uh yes.

Um so a couple things.

Um probably the largest piece of feedback that you probably need from us is the south facing um part of the building, or at least that we're getting guidance from uh Mr.

Lafontaine.

Um I do have concerns about what is gonna happen.

Um what will I I would like to see you know, potentially some glass there that's kind of just speaking for myself.

Um I that is gonna get a lot of exposure if for some reason, even when if the built decl decalories hopefully will stick around for a long time.

Uh but um if that's no longer there and it's replaced with something I regardless.

I think that's that's gonna be an exposed uh so I the south side is the top, uh the facing the street, uh to the right.

Well, this would be the side facing south facing south.

Okay, so that's the one that was the one abutting the the book.

So if you're traveling north on 28, what you're gonna see.

Um I I would just put my I I would say I'm I'm in an agreement with you, shed that that we should have some something there that needs a little yeah, just needs enhancements.

Otherwise, I think you've done a lot of really good work to respond to and thank you for that uh responding to a lot of the feedback and and and information.

Um, you know, I that this is the last thing if the chair will permit me.

Um, you know, for the uh the abutters that are here, um, you know, we're in a difficult position.

I think um the depot overlay district is poorly written and allows a lot of things that doesn't provide the vision for what I think was originally envisioned when it was created.

You know, the really the three things that we're able to review are the architectural character, the urban design, and site improvements.

Um you know, the with regards to setbacks, I will ask a question on that.

Um, but the you know, you know, commercial or um uh store, uh sorry, I'm just trying to get to it.

Um, you know, retail stores no greater than 15,000 square feet.

I mean, this is less than half of what was actually approved in the um original overlay district.

Uh we're our hands are tied on this matter.

Yeah, I would just say that um I I can honestly say I don't think an auto zone is what was envisioned uh when this was put together, but unfortunately the wording I think you know you know ties our hands, and I think that the best case scenario is working with uh the owner of the property and auto zone is the L C to work out you know some parking concerns, and I think everyone uh I I would charge that everyone here um shares the concern around that.

Um with regards to uh setbacks, uh Mr.

Lafontaine, what is the current setback on that corner near decoloris?

The the uh current setback for decorus or for 14.

I think it's 17.

17.

With the one that's proposed, you mean the one that's proposed.

Yeah, uh it is uh not on that plan.

It is uh 17 feet, yes.

And then the closest point because of the orientation of the lot line is actually here.

Um but seventeen feet to the side, twenty-four to the front, with the closest point being this area, this corner here.

Yeah, yeah.

Originally that was five, so we actually expanded that because of the remember the building before was 7300 square feet.

Yeah, and now we're 60, so we s made the building skinnier to increase that setback.

And then uh one other comment that I would make is I on the facade on the on the right side.

I think as as Jacob mentioned, you had us add the trees, which we you know, we happily did, but now and then we got a kind of a comment that I think the original comment was if this building was demolished later, we would want trees in between there.

So we added those in because of that.

Is that something that I guess we want or don't?

Because now it seems to be pushed back the other way when we just try to accommodate though I don't think it's gonna be pushed back.

No.

Um and then can you just confirm on the record that uh beer bottles can you know that that area that is in the back 40 there will be clean.

I mean, constructing sites and and and just an overall you know, respect for the property is not gonna be, you know.

I mean, not gonna be I don't want to uh the VFW that I think the applicant says uh uh abutter says like yo, people are drinking back there, and that that's not gonna be this type of place.

I guess it's gonna be a little different.

I think my closing statement, Mr.

Chair would just be I I think we really do need to review the uh depot overlay district the way it's worded.

Um it's the hand that taketh and giveth.

I mean, we're we want you to build buildings in the front of the street, but this is causing an issue for uh some of our abutters.

Um I I think just looking at the wording, you know, if we truly want to make this a pedestrian, I I think it should be written in such a way that we're not uh encouraging uh no offense to auto zone.

I have no nothing against autozone, uh, but that we're not encouraging you know small box you know, retailers that make their business on increased traffic.

We do we do have a rework of the uh depot overlay ordinance later, so yeah, great.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Ms.

Collison.

Uh thank you.

So um the moratorium that was mentioned is I assume that's a DOT moratorium.

Yes.

So that has nothing to do with with the town of Salem.

That's just the intersection work that was done by DOT.

If the town constructed, I can't remember if the town did that work.

So it might be a local.

I think it's us.

Yeah.

So we we generally haven't granted uh I my perspective is that the engineering division and the municipal services directed and municipal services division are uh you know would be reticent to grant a uh waiver of the moratorium.

But I listen, I certainly don't want to see any more construction in that in that area.

Um, but I was just inquiring um for my own knowledge about the moratorium.

This is the first I've heard of it.

Uh it makes sense, but it's the first I've heard of it.

Yeah, we have a five-year roll once we've laid down new construction asphalt, they'll dig it into it in five years.

Yeah, I assume as much.

Um, and then who owns the property currently?

Is it it's not the VFW, the owners of the VFW?

They've sold it and it's now being leased to AutoZone, yeah.

That's correct.

Um the owner of record, uh what's this map in one second?

Do you know the owner of Record Office?

Not the hands, I take it up.

That's okay.

Do so do Jacob, I I don't necessarily care about the specific owner, but um do we have any anything on record from the owner stating that like they're okay with this plan or anything of that nature?

Yeah, so the owner, yes, that we have they have to submit owner authorization with the application.

Um and we've got we got that.

Yeah, we could we when did you submit?

You submitted so generally we wouldn't.

We submitted the authorization in order to allow me to submit for yeah, but you're you submitted in April.

So I mean, there there sometimes there'd be a question of whether or not the authorization is stale, but if you submit it in April, then I think that would still be a valid authorization.

Okay.

Um then as it relates to the the concerns about um damage to neighboring foundations or anything of that nature.

Do you happen to know if there's going to be any sort of like um I don't know what the what the type of survey would be, but something to the effect of like a pre-blasting survey, like if you're doing any blasting nearby, like would there be a that type of a survey or similar of the neighboring properties before construction starts?

I think that would behoove both parties.

Um again, as site civil, this is a construct like you know, that would be our recommendation for sure.

The GC has not been hired, but that just seems to make sense.

I was actually thinking the same exact thing as your board member, so that that makes perfect sense.

When you come back, if you if you were you know, or our zone could have a conversation with the owner with the owner, or if you know you could have a conversation with autozone at all, if they would be willing to do a pre-blast type survey, um hopefully to ease the concerns of of the neighboring properties.

I think that would be really helpful.

Um again, not something that I I think that we can require, but I think it would be a simple good faith effort um behalf of autozone.

Um I think the only other comments that I had was related to um the depot village overlay district, and um as Mr.

Norcross had mentioned, it's not written very well.

Um fortunately, we're well unfortunately and fortunately, we're kind of in this interim period where we just adopted the master plan, which happened to be adopted the same day that AutoZone came in for their conceptual plan.

Um so AutoZone came in, presented this conceptual plan, which did not align with the master plan, but they're allowed to do they're allowed to present the plan because that's what's allowed in the current zoning.

Um so we're in this sort of interim period right now because the master plan is adopted and the zoning does not align with the master plan.

So um I was on the master plan steering committee, and we are we sort of the town, the planning board um are working on having a zoning rewrite done so that the master plan will be able to align with the current zoning.

Um and the depot is certainly a focus in that.

So when there is outreach being made about um, you know, if that we want the people in the depot to be able to engage in that process, I highly encourage um you guys to all participate.

I'd love to hear from you.

Thanks.

Anything else from the board?

Just a question for staff.

Uh as it relates to the depot overlay district, is what mechanisms exist for this construction to be done that is and not be compliant with that.

To put the building where the ex the prior building sat.

Well is there no variances or tools in which that could be accomplished?

They they could do that.

So the depot village overlay wants buildings oriented towards the street.

So I think the town uh and if you look at the 2011 report and the the uh committee that drafted the ordinance, uh, you know, the town views viewed this area, and I think still views this area as you know something kind of unique or or special, maybe distinct from the rest of 28, which has been developed as traditional strip development with you know, kind of a sea of parking, and then the building, you know, uh, you know, 200 feet set back from the from the right of way.

And the depot overlay actually requires that the parking be to the rear, requires that the buildings be oriented towards the street, and the idea was to kind of have it be more of a traditional downtown streetscape that you'd see.

So if the applicant similar to the 2022 application came in with the building to the rear, they could do that, they would require a variance, which is what they had to get in 2022 because it was between the three zones.

You know, they had some commercial parking in the residential district, they had some of the building in the residential district.

Um so the idea is that it's an innovative land use and it provides an incentive to say you don't need to go to the zoning board, the planning board can waive setbacks and and um lot coverage and reduced parking, and in exchange for that we get the higher quality of design, and then we'd also get kind of the type of development that the you know committee had envisioned.

Um hopefully that answers your question.

They could do that, but it's a different mechanism.

Uh in 2022, when the cigar lounge and retail came in, uh they initially came under the depot village overlay, but without really meeting any of the merit.

You know, they had the parking in the front, they had the building in the back, they you know didn't really provide any pedestrian amenities.

And the board at that time said, you know, we don't think you meet the merits of this ordinance, and therefore you need to come under the conventional uh uh uh underlying districts, which is what they did ultimately.

So I don't know, I don't know if that helps or not, but the the depot so they the applicant had an option to to go to zoning and get a variance to to build it where the prior structure was, and that they have elected to not do that and to comply with the depot overlay.

Yeah, and I think I would say that that the town is kind of indicated by adoption of that ordinance by providing incentives to comply with the overlay district that that's the type that's the form of development that we would like there.

Uh that we didn't want it to be developed in a traditional strip, you know, uh development manner, like you see a lot on 28.

We wanted it to be kind of more of a a downtown.

If you look at old photos of the depot, we kind of had that uh, you know, what 60, 70 years ago, and it kind of looked like a quaint New England downtown, and um still some portions do, but it really kind of got redeveloped, and that was what the previous proposal had, you know, majority of the parking on the front, the building set to the rear.

Uh when I met with uh the applicant, I did share with them the depot village overlay, and to their credit, they uh you know adhered to it.

Yeah, I I just I I just I understand the everything that you explained to me, but there's so much harm done to the abutters in this situation, and the applicant himself said it would be much cheaper for them to build the structure where the prior structure was that in this look in this instance.

I guess I would I I would feel better about it if they were doing it where the old building was because of the impact to the other people that are the abutters that they can't be changed.

I mean, D.

Calorist is losing 60% of their parking.

I don't know what they're gonna do.

And yet, I mean there they can legally this can legally be done to them, but how is that really beneficial to the town just because this building's gonna be closer to the street and have more windows on the one side?

And the big picture, I think there's a lot more harm being done by this development than it's benefiting the town.

Yes, it checks the boxes of the overlay district, but we already have said we want to change it, we don't like it.

Yeah, so it it's just my opinion, but I just I I think there's more harm done than good by the way that this is being presented, but it's the applicant's choice.

Um, but there is an avenue in which they could do it differently, is that's all I wanted to know.

And that there is an avenue for them to do that.

So yeah, and I guess not to tell too much.

I mean, I I guess the idea would be that you know, you're the idea would be to plan for the long term, right?

I mean, I I understand and certainly I'm sympathetic.

The the depot village talks a lot, it promotes shared parking arrangements, and generally that would be done with you know a form that's recorded, and uh the town isn't really a party to the private agreement that existed, but I would guess I'd also say, you know, if you look at the adjacent parcels, I I think to orient it towards the street probably is more in keeping.

I mean, you've got the you know the dentist office uh oriented towards the street with a even closer setback.

Uh this building is proposed at a pretty consistent setback with the book store.

The piano store is pretty much you know at a zero foot setback.

You know, I mean, so it's we're I think that's the type of development pattern that we that we'd like to see, or at least that's the discussion that was had in 2011 with that committee.

Um so absolutely, I mean I I I think it's promising.

You know, I read from NHDOT they said that this is a low traffic generator.

You know, so my hope would be that with a will and property owner that you know they're gonna be able to make things work, and yes, of course, uh the parking is not as convenient to the bookstore as it historically has been.

But if the you know property owner saying you can use our uh excess parking and they've provided additional parking and would be required under the ordinance, the hope would be that you know it'll end up working out for for the adjacent pro uh properties.

I don't think those sites are probably parked at what's required, and that you know, they've been there for a very very long time.

So it it's it I think it we couldn't really put the burden on this applicant, especially when the town wasn't a party to the the private agreement.

I did meet with the butters and I think a couple of times, and um, you know, I certainly understand uh the position.

Can you read the conditions into the record, please?

Oh wait, one sorry before you do.

Um my only comment is if you could just um enhance that uh self-facing uh wall behind the vegetative vegetative screen if you could work with the planning department to put some enhancements on that um cell facing wall behind that um screening in case that every area opened opened up.

Okay, so the same with the Fox windows outside.

Yeah, just work with the planning department.

They Jacob knows architecture.

So one more thing, Mr.

Chairman.

Oh, go ahead, please.

Yeah, concerning that south uh side wall.

Would uh you all be okay with flow windows there instead of real glass windows, something like what after furniture did face in 28.

Yeah, that's what they proposed.

Uh on the north facing and the east face, so it'd be good to replicate that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh can recommended conditions of approval would be one prior to building permit satisfied third party third-party design review.

That'd be relative to the uh retaining wall, the bench detail, the uh signage, and then two submit staff approvals that would include review from the engineering division who uh would weigh in in terms of the drainage issues that have been raised, and then also the fire department uh who do review hazardous materials and have standards for those items.

Um sorry, three pay for outside inspections per direction of engineering division.

Uh four enhanced southern facade with tinted opaque faux window glass windows under uh prior to occupancy.

Well, one thing I didn't talk about was the impact fee.

I uh in your pack it was an impact fee calculation that was based on the site as if it were vacant.

Um it came out to be something pretty high, and I wasn't quite sure uh if that was appropriate.

I looked back at the 2022 approval.

We did offer a credit for the VFW.

It's a little hard to calculate because it's kind of a unique land use.

So uh I looked at the VFW, it was about 7300 of uh uh usable area.

We credited that for the traffic and the public safety.

For public safety, it comes out as a wash.

Uh for traffic, there's a net uh uh of eighteen thousand thirty-six dollars.

I think that that may be reviewed by the applicant.

Reason being because again, we don't have a great uh land use category.

Our uh impact fee table doesn't capture everything.

So I kind of this often on under um kind of a membership club, but it's really more so for uh fitness and health.

So that's more of a gym than it is uh uh you know VFW.

And I I I agree with you, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but it also you know it's clearly not uh you know a re well, I guess maybe you could call it a retail store and then it'd be a wash, but uh you know assembly.

a great uh land use category our uh impact fee table doesn't capture everything so I kind of do this off on under um kind of a membership club but it's really more so for uh fitness and health so that's more of a gym than it is uh uh you know VFW and I I I agree with you it doesn't make a lot of sense but it also you know it's clearly not uh you know a re well I guess maybe you could call it a retail store and then it'd be a wash but uh you know we don't we don't have a bigger club works yeah we don't have a designated category so if we go with that I think that you know I my recommendation is that you would approve it with a uh a road impact fee of eighteen thousand thirty six dollars they have worked with GPI and they could they could can you know they could do a calculation and come back to this board and you know have you uh amend that if if needed that's fine yeah uh but I just wanted to let you know initially it was calculated as a vacant loss so it's gonna be you know thirty six thousand seven hundred dollars and a public safety fee of thirty six almost thirty seven hundred but um you know we do credit the prior use and obviously the FW had traffic associated and public safety associated with it um uh under I'm sorry four five five occupancy uh all right so did I already read the uh pay road impact fee of eighteen thousand thirty six dollars you started to okay so that's five and then six is construct all site improvements in accordance with the approved plan seven uh sign package shall be approved by planning board I wrote in and design consultant prior to issuance of sign permit I imagine the board probably would like the design consultant to weigh on that's right yeah all right uh eight no no vehicle repairs or maintenance shall occur on site nine applicant must operate business so that parking lot capacity is not exceeded and then 10 all representations made by applicant and agents on all notes on the plan are incorporated as part of the approval yeah may I ask a quick question I was under the impression that um the side applicant would only have to go through this board if it's a conditional use if it's not it can just go through the boat we would we would still want them if it is something that can be administratively approved we'd still want them to weigh in on it ultimately okay um because it was a requirement for the site plan application so by not requiring it right now you know I think they're they're kind of saying you can come back and show us I guess what ultimately is going to be installed.

So but administratively approval means it means that you public hearing or no no public hearing so we would probably just submit stuff to you guys and you would tell us if it's we would generally do it under public matters and say you know hey they submitted their sign application this is what they're proposed and it's been reviewed by our design consultant our UK and then get the okay from the board we have uh 10 conditions I'll entertain a motion Mr.

Chair I move to grant conditional approval of the plan subject to the 10 conditions as outlined by Mr.

Lafontaine got a motion a second to uh you know approve the plan too uh just didn't right yeah we would yeah got a motion to uh grant conditional approval with the 10 conditions noted uh with the auto zone site plan um any further discussion on that all in favor opposing it's uh five one thank you thank you all set thanks so much um next item of uh new business is the Sarage Realty that was withdrawn uh so the next item of new business is the Rockingham Christ uh Rockingham Christian church site plan it's a public hearing for revised site plan adding 150 seats with a conditional use permit for reduced parking at two key weight and drive plan complete yes the plan's complete Ms.

Chair move to accept the plan is complete motion a second to accept the Rockingham Christian church site plan all those in favor it's unanimous um butters please the abutters are as follows if you're here please indicate by saying so they are GCD Salem hospitality Salem lodging our ruin real estate leasing and that is all thank you go to the applicant to present the plan good evening everybody record Chris York from GPI this came before the board back in April of 2018.

It's the same proposal they wanted to increase the seating capacity from 250 to 400 seats that was approved back then but nothing ever happened with it so we're back here again tonight asking for the same conditional use conditional use permit.

So there's currently that's a 250 seats within the church itself so there's 94 seat the 94 spaces on the property is 139 required for the uh parking requirements so there's a shortage of the math is 45 seats 45 spaces on site but they are they do have parking uh agreements with two different properties think so the property to the west to the you know to the top of the property to the top of the sheet is 25 Pelham Road they have an agreement with them for a hundred parking spaces with also a pedestrian pathway step staircase that was built recently to kind of get people that park over there to the you know get to the back of the uh back of the church through that new step that was proposed that was uh built recently they also have an agreement with uh 20 I get the streets mixed up 20

They have an agreement with them for a hundred parking spaces.

There's also a pedestrian pathway step uh staircase that was built recently to kind of get people that park over there to the you know get to the back of the uh back of the church through that new step that was proposed uh that was uh built recently.

They also have an agreement with the 20.

I get the streets mixed up, 205 Pelum Road and 23 Styles Road.

Yeah, seven styles.

I was kind of confused, yeah.

25 Pelham, seven styles.

Seven styles with the though they have a parking arena with seven styles for 20 with for kind of 20 seat, 20, 20 parking spaces as well.

So generally that those 20 spaces are further back, those would only be used generally for kind of the bigger events, you know, the holiday church, I think a holiday gatherings.

But the 100 spaces to the north of the uh to the west of the property, those spaces are currently used to some degree, you know, between those and the 94 spaces on site, that gets us well over the max, well over the required 139 spaces that are needed for a typical there they have stuff they have church uh gatherings 9.30 and 9 and 1030 on Sundays just once a week.

So other than that, nothing's changed on the plans.

There's no proposed proposals, no proposed changes to the plan itself to the site itself.

So thanks.

Okay.

One of the staff comments.

Uh I don't have a whole outside to Mr.

York's presentation.

Uh they are requesting to add 150 seats to the existing 250 seat church.

That results in 400 seats total.

Um as Mr.

York indicated, they did receive approval from this board.

Uh that was in April of 2018, and that plan ultimately was never signed and never uh acted on.

Uh the uh major discrepancy from that plan versus what is being proposed now is that they were previously relying on uh available parking at one key Waiden Drive, which is the margaritas and holiday in.

They are no longer doing that, so at the time we were gonna have them install a crosswalk to cross across Key Waiden.

Um they have obviously uh added the pedestrian bridge, which this board approved under public matters.

Um I think it was earlier this year to install that.

Uh so 125 120 of those spaces are provided off-site.

They do need 45 uh additional spaces more than that what they have, you know.

So 139 spaces required, 94 provided.

But again, as Mr.

York uh outlined, they've got a hundred spaces at 25 Pelham Road.

So that's where this bridge terminates, and then just to the west is where seven styles is.

Um, and I don't know if there's any pedestrian connection, but those parking lots are pretty much right next to each other.

So I imagine that uh, you know, one of the comments from the staff level was that the bridge terminates into a parking spot, but my sense is that they probably have the members of the church who are probably more able-bodied, you know, park off-site because obviously this is not an ADA connection.

Um, so maybe it's not a huge deal that it terminates into a parking space.

One other item I do have is that these two sign uh these two ADA spaces don't appear to have upright signs.

So I just asked the applicant to clean that up, add the two upright signs to the ADA uh spaces that exist there.

Um changes uh to the site, no changes of the driveway.

And uh that's it if if the board uh actually I do have a comment on the agreement.

Um so I asked the board to see off-site parking agreements, seven styles road is dated for 2018, uh, and we would need an executive draft, so that draft hadn't been signed.

I imagine that was probably associated with their prior approval.

So we would need a current uh draft of that and one that is signed.

And then I also noted that uh it notes that the agreement can be terminated terminated within 90 days, then that 25 Pelham Road agreement terminates April 30th, 2027, and that the board may want agreements recorded in assurance of long-term use.

Um so I just would note that for the board's consideration.

Okay.

Could you make a condition that if that's if it's term if the termination is an accurate upon and the site planning gets terminated?

Um yeah, I guess right so the the site plan would be contingent on a off site parking agreement for uh 120 spaces.

So if that terminates, they could come in maybe for a proposal at margaritas or something.

Yeah, okay.

Would it then revert back to what was allowed before?

What's that?

If we're allowing up to what 400 contingent on the parking, the off-site parking arrangements.

If those off-site parking arrangements are ended at any point in time, then it would then automatically revert back to the 250 seats that's currently allowed.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

I imagine that's the case, but I figure I'd ask the question.

It should.

Why don't we read the conditions into the record?

Uh recommended conditions of approval would be prior to occupancy.

One submit staff approvals, two, install upright ADA signs at Easterly ADA parking spaces.

Three, submit executed and recorded parking agreement uh for uh 120 parking spaces.

Uh that was uh four no conditional use permit for reduced parking on plan.

I had this one for your consideration.

I have submit guarantee for post-occupancy parking study to be submitted six to nine months post-occupancy and addressed if needed.

We've done that historically for conditional use permits, but I wanted that to be sound like it's needed with the uh with the hours on this one.

Okay, and the hours of operation and the other uh uses for the okay, the other buildings.

Okay.

Um so for so now uh five is applicant must operate business so that parking lot capacity is not exceeded.

Uh six, all representations made by applicant or agents and all notes on the plan are incorporated as part of the approval.

And I guess we should probably have another one that says um you know increase in seat counts is contingent upon uh you know share uh uh parking agreement being recorded or or parking agreement being submitted.

Okay.

Any uh discussion from the board on this one?

The only thing it's is on that note, Jacob.

I I would suggest that you in plain English it says if something happens to that parking, it reverts back to 250 seats.

There's 10 years from now, none of us are gonna remember this.

No, I'm a chance.

And if there's no note that says that straight out in plain English, it's never gonna happen.

Okay.

Uh three with the um submit the executed report of parking agreement.

You could probably just add that from there.

So uh something to the effect that if parking agreement is terminated, then uh seats will revert back to uh 250.

I just wanted to clarify uh so currently on site there's 94 spots, they're required to have 139 based on the standards for 400 seats.

Yeah, so they're 45 short, but they're providing an additional 120, so they're actually providing 75 more than what's required.

Yeah, I get where you're going.

It's a good point.

So if you wanted to, you can make a contingent on uh off-site agreement for 45 spaces rather than the 120, and that would seven staff.

So for instance, if they lost the 20, it wouldn't matter, right?

So it really should be a specific number that is required.

They're more than exceeding their parking requirements with the agreements that they've they've presented.

So I agree.

No match.

We don't do that.

Uh any members of the public like to speak on the plan.

No, but that will explain a motion.

Ms.

Chair, I move the grant of conditional use permit under 490-701 D1, allowing 94 spaces where 139 spaces are required, referencing the letter from the applicant dated 1117 2025, and grant conditional approval of the site plan subject to the six conditions, seven conditions noted by Mr.

Lafontaine.

Second.

Motion and a second to grant the conditional use permit um and uh prove the uh Rockingham's Christmas church site plan with the seven conditions and lowered.

Um any further discussion on that?

All those in favor?

That's unanimous, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh last item of new business tonight is the uh Salem and IMLC site plan.

That's a public hearing for change of use for 19,600 square foot restaurant and entertainment use with conditional use permit for reduced parking and additional signage at 11 mall road.

Is the plan complete?

Yes, the plan's complete.

Ms.

Chair move to accept the plan as complete.

Second motion and second to accept the salem NIM LLC site plan as complete.

All is in favor.

That's unanimous.

Thank you.

The butters, please.

The abutters are as follows.

If you're here, please indicate by Sam.

So they are Rock Sal Mall, LOC, Tuscan Village Master Development, Artisan at Tuscan Village Holdings, and another Rock Sal Mall.

That is all.

Thank you.

But to the applicant to present the plan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board.

My name is David Campbell.

I'm an attorney from Nashville.

I represent uh Salem Nim LLC, which is the holding company name of the property, but the Lions Group is the applicant.

With us tonight, with me tonight is uh David Joakin.

Um he's the CFO of the Lions Group and a principal.

More importantly, he's a native of Methouen.

Uh and uh and Richard Schlichting from uh Langdon, who's gonna do the bulk of the presentation, this ethnical presentation of of what we have here tonight.

Um we had a conceptual meeting in October, and I just want to just briefly fly through some of the things for the for the formal application tonight.

Um the Lions Group is one of the most uh preeminent and successful restaurant groups in in Boston and and New England.

Um today, the Lions Group runs 44 restaurants in five states, including two dozen in Greater Boston and uh six at Mohegan Sun.

Um each restaurant offers a different dining experience, um, and together they have literally become a part of the dining and entertainment fabric of Boston.

The Lions Group's uh varied and inspired uh visions include uh neighborhood hangouts like Harvard Gardens and Lucky's Lounge, back bay institutions like Sonsi and Jasp in the Summer Shack, a culinary acclaimed restaurants like Barenza, uh Scampos and Rochambeau, and sports venues destinations at King's Bowl America and the Bleacher Bar located directly underneath the Centerfield Bleachers at Fenway.

Tonight the um Lions Group is proposing to uh bring to Salem two of its most successful and iconic restaurants, Game On, which is under Fenway Park and has other locations, and Loretta's last call, um, both under one roof uh in Salem at the former Sears Tire Center on at 11 Mall Road.

Uh we believe this project will stand alongside and compliment all of Salem's abutting and nearby retail dining and entertainment success stories, like those at Tuscan Village, Dick's House of Sports, Cinemark, and uh and the casino that's that's coming.

Um we have been uh in touch since the con the since the uh conceptual plan with with Jacob the board gave us permission to talk about the signage and the and the elevations with directly with him.

Um he's made some comments to us.

I think we're gonna have a meeting within the next week uh to hopefully hammer out and finalize those elevations and those and those sign details.

Um we also understand you know the parking uh that Stephen Perna is working actively on the parking, and that will be ready very shortly.

Um we are very hopeful to get everything any input we get from you for the board tonight and from Jacob at our meeting in a few days, uh, so we can make the submittal deadline of uh December 29th and hopefully come back here on the 13th of January and uh be able to get get approval so we can we can get going and have this thing operational this summer.

Um I do want to apologize for uh uh Patrick's lions.

He really wanted to be here, but he had a long planned uh uh family vacation that conflicted with us.

So uh in his stead and uh is uh is David Joachin who's gonna make a few com comments about the concept.

Um David, you want to come up.

Hi, my name is David Joquin.

Um born and raised in Methoan, first 25 years of my life.

Um laughed with Jacob about going to Granite State Chip as a kid, picking up huge boxes with my dad, and um uh didn't even mention my uncle worked at the Sears, um, Sam Branca for years uh after the Lawrence store closed.

So um it's fun to come home, makes my mom happy.

Um but we're really excited to bring these two projects uh to Salem.

We know that people of Salem Methuen in the Greater Merrimack Valley area um will will really enjoy our product that we we have the game on uh concept which we expanded at Mohegan Sun to include bowling.

Uh we also have the King's Lanes.

We have 12 of those, but we really wanted to do game on here.

We think that the connection to Fenway Park uh is a natural as we and we're gonna grow this brand.

This is gonna be uh the flagship, if you will, and we're gonna do proof of concept here and then roll it out to other places with Lorettas.

Loretta's is our country bar, um, very well received.

Uh Nashville acts as well as local acts.

And architectural services, as well as we've got Lang uh engineering, who's worked on almost all these projects around here to make sure that parking and site work is all done up to up to uh par for the town of Salem.

So we're gonna have we're gonna do 10 lanes of bowling, we're gonna have games, we're gonna have um uh a bar, and then we're gonna have live music and dining in Lorettas, as well as uh line dancing lessons and uh you know uh a full patio with dining uh on on the southwest side, I guess.

Um so we we are just really excited to come up here and uh launch these two product products uh in an exciting location uh across the street from what Mr.

Farrow has done with his team.

Um we just think we're gonna be a nice addition to your to your area to your neighborhood.

Thank you.

Okay, we'll um go through the agenda that we have, yeah, and then we'll come back and get come to questions with the board, yeah.

Hello, as said I'm Richard Schlichten from Langan Engineering.

Um roll us through the actual plan so you know what's going on.

Um so as mentioned um we are proposing our um project at the former Sears in that mall area near the Cinemark and the exporting goods.

Um currently um next slide, you can kind of see the series of scene better days.

Um you have some of the wall paneling falling off, you know, the asphalt's pretty old, just not looking great.

Um yeah, you can skip through a couple of these.

This was actually just taken this weekend.

Um, and then so what we're proposing as you saw in the first slide in this next one, um, you know, kind of a revamp of the area, um, putting in some trees, landscaping, um, redoing the siding, um, you know, new signage, parking, etc.

You go to the next one.

Um, you know, as mentioned, we're looking for a conditional use permit on signage.

Um, so you will see signage as we go through.

Um, but you know, this is kind of a mall walkable area with a lot of parking around it.

We're hoping to have this signage to help a wayfighting and B, just you know, you're in the area of the mall, helping people see our brand.

Um to look inside the building.

Um as mentioned, it's half game on half-loretta's.

Um Loretta's is shown in that um tan area in the top right with um seating for restaurants, performing area, and a bar.

Um, and then the larger area in blue is game on.

You can see the 10 um bowling lanes, some billiard tables, um, games, bar, etc.

And then the um purple area is just shared backroom, um, so you know, kitchen, etc.

Um for our site improvements.

We are looking to um mill an overlay, um majority of the asphalt out there and do a lot of restriping.

Um, as mentioned, it's um been a while since this space has been used.

So we're adding more crosswalks for accessibility.

Um, also when we came for our um concept meeting, um, we talked about the crosswalk um plan left um to connect to the rest of the parking.

Um while that isn't our um parking per se, it is on the mall lot.

Um, you know, people are gonna walk in a lot of places and you know have a lot of places to go in.

Um so figure that safest thing to do.

Um if you go back for one more sec, yeah.

Um also um just revamping the exterior of the building as you saw in the um nice pictures earlier, as well as adding a um overhanging patio in the bottom left of the building.

Um that's just for Loretta's seating.

Um we want to make this kind of a you know, not just an indoor place.

If you're coming here for lunch, especially in the summer, you know, a lot of people like sitting outside.

Um also in their corner is a flagpole, um, some signage, just kind of trying to make it a fun area.

Um, but speaking of the signs, um I'm gonna go side by side of the building, just so you know exactly what we're looking at.

Um this is plan top of the page or west, um, the game on main entrance.

Um from this view, you'll be able to see um kind of the protrusion for the front door where you have the um drink play win um game signage um as well as the game on lit up sign that's coming off the building, and a um painted wall graphic of people cheering.

Um also mentioned as we go, um we are in talks with Jacob about all the signage and having a meeting within the next week to hopefully you know narrow down everything.

Um as you go clockwise around the building.

We're now looking at um plan left or the south side of the building.

Um from this side, you can still see two of the sides for Game On for the people coming from that south southern parking lot, um, as well as most of the Loretta signs.

Um you can see the main Loretta main Loretta's sign as long as as well as the LED lights for the guitar.

Um also a signage for the performers and the Loretta star up on the column.

Um this is also the corner where the flagpole will be.

Um as you keep moving around, you can still see the flagpole, um, and you could still see the patio because it wraps around.

Um we still have that star twice, as well as another Loretta's sign above the patio.

Um also in the far right corner, we do have a game on sign.

Um the purpose of that is if you're parking on that eastern side of the building or driving by, you can know that there's a game on the other side of the building for wayfinding.

And then the final side, you can now see the front of the building again with those initial two signs we're talking about, as well as a Loretta's side sign to do basically the same as that previous game on sign did to show that Loretta's is around that side of the building.

Because if people are parking in the northern lot, we want them to know where to go.

Um the other conditional use permit we are looking at is a parking um change.

Um we previously came in 204 2014, 2024 for a conditional use permit of other improvements on the site, and that um let me start over it.

Um this whole mall site requires 5,573 spaces.

Um in 2024, last year, we came from other improvements to request um a decrease to 4,579 spaces.

That was approved, all got through, everything got built.

Um during that conditional use permit, this was a very conceptual restaurant.

We didn't really have exactly what was gonna be there.

This was in conjuncture with other upgrades on the site, which is why we were decreasing that much.

Um but now that we have Loretta's and Game On figured out, we have the site designed, um, everything worked out, that additional crosswalk.

Um we are seeing um that we need to remove 16 more spaces, bringing us down to that 5,000 4,563, which compared to the required is a thousand and ten decrease.

But compared to the last year approval, it is just a 16 spot decrease.

We do not see it as a that big of a decrease, but we did have a parking utilization study.

Look at it, which I will get into now.

Um this is obviously a very large lot with over five over 4,000 spaces.

So during the previous parking utilization study, um, we looked at this portion we called C, which basically feeds Digsaw Sport, Cinemark, and this future restaurant, now Loretta's in Game On.

So we call that C.

We went out this year to look at parking counts.

Friday and Saturday being the most busy for obvious reasons.

And apologies, I'm gonna butcher the numbers a little bit because I can't read it perfectly.

But in this lot C, we have about a thousand in eighty some odd spaces.

During the peak days of Friday and Saturday, we were under 300 spaces.

Of this, and that's just to do with the fact of how you know requirements in these large mall spaces are calculated.

But just to be sure, um we also added our max demand of what we presume this will um this site will cause, and that is still in the 400s, decreasing 16 spaces.

We are still over 600 spaces in excess.

Um but obviously big day of the year, it's Black Friday.

And if you click one more there, um this Black Friday study was done in 2013.

Um we looked at Black Fly Black Friday, and the Saturday after.

Saturday after is the orange one on the bottom at 175.

Obviously, not what is really important here.

The blue had 645.

Um parking spaces full.

Um obviously a lot more than a normal weekend, which is expected.

Um, but also this was taken before the before other improvements in the lot.

So um in adding our presumed additional spaces and the additional spaces from other improvements in the lot.

We're expecting about 884 um spaces being used during a peak Black Friday time, and that is also assuming that Game On and Loretta's is being used at peak during Black Friday, which is possible, it's not very expected.

Um so even that 884 is lower than that 1000.

Um, and this says 86 because that's what we currently have.

But when we decrease 16, that 884 is still um almost 200 spaces less than what we would be providing in that C lot.

Um then finally, just last thing with the parking, um that 20 um 24 um proposal um had anticipated trip generation of about um 2022 trips daily.

Um that was approved based off the rough restaurant retail counts of ITE.

However, now that we know it's a Loretta's in a game on and everything is more designed using ITE, you could get a much more accurate um count, and we believe our weekday total is going to be um about 549 less, um, which is equivalent to about 26 less cars in an hour than we had previously come to the board with.

Um, yes, I believe that's it.

Thank you.

Thanks.

We'll um go to uh uh planning department to hear their staff comments and then uh go to the board uh comments and get some questions for you.

Thanks.

Do you want me to stay up or more?

Uh no, we can hear from Jacob and then uh bring you back up once we go to the board for comments.

Sound good.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So this uh proposal is to reuse the former Sears Auto Center.

Uh the history with this site is uh that it was approved under the Cinemark proposal that showed this building being converted to two restaurants with 400 seats and a retail store.

Uh in obviously they never move forward with that application.

You held a conceptual discussion in September uh to review this application.

Uh um won't summarize uh what the applicant already stated, it's game on Loretta's last call, entertainment, and uh in kind of a uh restaurant use.

So in terms of because I think this is probably gonna be where a lot of the discussion uh may go today, in terms of the elevations, these are the elevations that were uh presented to you uh back in September when you had that conceptual discussion.

with 400 seats in a retail store uh in obviously they never move forward with that application you held the conceptual discussion in September uh to review this application uh I won't summarize uh what the applicant already stated it's game on Loretta's last call entertainment and uh and kind of a uh restaurant use so in terms of because I think this is probably going to be where a lot of the discussion uh may go today in terms of the elevations these are the elevations that were uh presented to you uh back in September when you had that conceptual discussion so uh I think they did an excellent job I think Loretta's last call looks great I think this corner uh is impressive and it remains substantially the same as what was shown to you in uh September so uh the September image here and then uh Loretta's last call pretty much remains exactly the same they did uh try to break up some of the blank facade over here by adding these pilasters or brick columns um but I I think uh the Loretta's last call aspect looks good the signage I've asked for dimensions of uh it is a lot of signage but I've asked them to kind of look to the to the Tuscan village sign standards because our current sign ordinance doesn't really anticipate kind of creative signage like we've seen at Tuscan and this applicant I think is is you know kind of trying to accomplish what we've seen uh in many instances at at Tuscan so I've asked them to consult that uh the Tuscan village sign standards and try to work within it because I do have some concerns about some of the signage that's presented um but uh this facade this is the west facing facade so it faces towards Cinemark and this is what was proposed to you in uh September and it has changed and and uh I did meet with the applicant earlier today to voice some of my concerns with the change.

I think if you remember at the September meeting I made various comments about the the uh elevations and uh I highlighted that our design guidelines talk about you know increased transparent increased transparency so uh they did try to break up the facade by adding these brick columns but it it really has kind of changed this entryway so they've eliminated uh and we'll see better on the uh the two-dimensional elevation but um you know they've eliminated this patio here which I think was really kind of a uh you know a moment as the point of entry and uh and they've changed it kind of to this which is still a uh entry or point uh you know moment but it's uh you know there's no fenestration there's no uh transparency uh you know this is kind of a you know a brick vestibule so uh in talking with the applicant earlier I asked them to uh you know maybe revisit that and see what we could do to enhance it at my understanding is that it's changed because of the internal programming they kind of uh laid out the bowling lanes a little differently than what was previously shown and they've also said that um at their other locations uh they own Kings Bowl and they do have patios at some of those locations but they don't find high utilization so I understand why they wouldn't want to build something that's not going to get utilized but maybe there's the ability to accomplish kind of uh what what they were accomplishing here without kind of losing uh that entire um you know they they had uh change the materials or they had this projection here um some variation in height uh you know the on ends help um so that was something that we discussed earlier today and as the applicant indicated we intend to meet within the next week or so to try to iron out um some revisions here the other area I I just kind of had I wanted to highlight was uh was this area here it is back of house but it faces Mall Road um so you know we just want to see if we could just maybe pay some attention to this one thing that was inconsistent through the renderings in the site plane were the material of the dumpster enclosure so that was raised uh today and I'm sure we can iron that out there was also a discussion about the ability to provide uh some additional landscape and where possible so um you know this area here seems like there's probably some ability uh to to add an enhance with some vegetation um and then the signage uh again you know I I think if if they kind of use the Tuscan village sign standards which do allow for some more creative signage I think that we could probably accomplish uh or they could probably accomplish something uh you know pretty unique and and exciting and this is as well but you know if you look at our design guidelines and the sign Tuscan village sign standards you know generally you're looking for a hierarchy of signage so you'd have Loretta's last call kind of be the principal sign and then the live music be secondary it's not shown on this one but on one of their elevations they've got like a very large tagline that almost overpowers the primary sign the game on signage so you know that would be a comment from the staff would be to consider you know removing uh I think it says uh home of the goat fan which is true you know New England is the home of the goat fan but uh you know I think you know we could maybe I don't know that we need a sign to say that I think people already know that um and then in in terms of the elevation these are the elevations that uh were submitted uh back in September so you can kind of see a little bit better in terms of that entryway uh you know what what they had uh proposed there and they have again broken up the this facade which was requested at the time with uh those columns and those continue throughout this is an excerpt from our design guidelines that talk about that you know to break up the the facade and this is what's proposed now so um

Um then in terms of the elevation, these are the elevations that uh were submitted uh back in September.

So you can kind of see a little bit better in terms of that entryway, uh, you know, what what they had uh proposed there, and they have again broken up the this facade, which was requested at the time with uh those columns, and those continue throughout.

This is an excerpt from our design guidelines that talk about that, you know, to break up the the facade.

And this is what's proposed now.

So you know, the the columns I think are a welcome addition.

You know, we we saw it on uh application earlier tonight.

We've seen it on several applications where you know the applicant wouldn't add windows here because you don't want to, you know, light up the bowling alley or have sun glare when people are trying to bowl, but there is the potential ability to add faux windows or spandul glazing, which is what we've seen uh at several other uh uh locations.

This is that signage that I referred to down here, and then the same uh with the Loretta's last call.

Um I also asked the applicant to ensure that they provide the size dimensions.

Right now they have approximate size dimensions, but I also would want to verify that they're calculating that consistent with the way that we uh calculate signage, which is the extreme uh portions of each sign.

Uh the applicant already showed these, so I don't really dwell on these, but you know, this is a this is a welcome addition to Salem.

It's a welcome addition to the site.

Uh you know, it's been well underutilized, and I think it creates a great synergy between you know the development across the street at Tuscan, Dick's House of Sports, Cinemark, uh the charitable gaming.

You know, we're really kind of seeing uh the mall redevelop and redefine itself and become an entertainment destination.

So I think it's excellent.

Uh you know, I know I critiqued some of the elevations.

I just want to acknowledge that you know we're very excited uh to see this build and reutilized.

This material, uh, a lot of it is going to be repurposed.

They're gonna paint this brick down here uh red, they're gonna paint this kind of that green monster uh color, and uh that's similar to what they did at Dick's House of Sport.

You can see this is actually really the same kind of side and painted it here and then painted the the base red.

This I think I showed you back in September.

It was just to highlight uh you know what the board did by requiring uh higher standard of design.

This is what the Dick's House Asport initially proposed, and then through your comments, uh, you know, this is ultimately what was uh uh constructed, which I think was a great benefit uh to the town and to the project.

We talked a little bit about creative ways to to break up the facade, so obviously this is their uh their flagship, their their only game on location, uh, and it's at Fenway Park, and you know, they've broken up the facade with with these uh flags.

We talked about that, maybe being something they could incorporate the retired numbers or the flags.

Um they've done the columns, so maybe this the these uh aren't necessary, but I just kind of wanted to show a precedent example because they've used Fenway as a precedent for for this construction.

Um these were some pedestrian connections that we highlighted and to their the applicant's credit, they addressed uh pretty much all of these.

One thing I think that was just missed, and I spoke of the applicant earlier today, and it's gonna be added as a sidewalk to per to connect to this uh uh connection.

We do have a small gap here, I guess, between the pass through that connects to Pleasant Street, but essentially it would kind of close that loop to some degree.

They're also providing a crosswalk here, and then they're gonna stripe a space down here.

You can see that on the plan.

Those are the areas that we highlighted previously.

One item I wanted to raise again was the granite curb.

And we required that for Cinemark for new curbing and uh replace curbing.

So I would just ask for your direction on that.

Right now, they're proposing uh concrete curving.

Uh the bituminous uh curving, not that it's the same as the concrete, but um often gets chewed up, so oftentimes we're our site plan regulations and our design guidelines are require or requesting granite vertical granite curbing uh you know at times of redevelopment.

So they are replacing the curb in, I think uh pretty much the entire perimeter of the parking lot, and then uh also along the building.

You know, maybe a compromises that they use vertical granite curving along the building, and maybe you're okay with concrete around the perimeter.

But I wanted to bring that to your attention.

These are those pedestrian improvements, uh, so I think it's excellent because you know they're gonna they are relying on some of this parking field to the south, so they'll have uh an easy connection to the uh field to the south, they'll have uh pedestrian connection that will align with Cinemark.

Again, hopefully it'll be a pretty neat synergy between this use and the in the movie theater, uh, another pedestrian connection up here to the north.

So I think it's excellent because you know they're gonna they are relying on some of this parking field to the south so they'll have uh an easy connection to the uh field to the south they'll have uh pedestrian connection that'll align with Cinemark again hopefully it'll be a pretty neat synergy between this use and the in the movie theater uh another pedestrian connection up here to the north uh the applicant intends to add they'll add a tip down here too at the ADA spaces that was just overlooked uh the plantin plan so I just I talked with the applicant a little bit about this uh they're not proposing a substantial amount of new plantins they are proposing uh four new trees uh we would just want to review that with our site plan regulations which require one tree per 10 spaces and we'd probably want to look at that I know they only have uh 60 some on spaces on site but we want to look at that with their parking demand generally we're looking at uh trying to enhance spaces as much as we can throw there is some mature vegetation on site you know like this alley this boulevard kind of here was recently enhanced and I don't think there's really any modification that's needed there but I did take some photos just from street view so again mature vegetation but we would probably want that to be called out on the plan to be uh uh to be saved sometimes what happens during construction is if it's not called out specifically you go out and ask what happens um so I think it'd be good to kind of you know if a lot of this is probably fine to remain maybe just need some maintenance um there's some gaps in in certain areas which could probably be filled in but you know this is that boulevard that looks really good there's some mature vegetation I think it just should be uh shown on the plan and again this is that boulevard uh that uh was recently planted and does look good that crossing would come down here um they are requesting a conditional use permit for parking uh that is going to be reviewed by Steve Pernau our traffic consultant um I think the board's pretty familiar with that process through previous applications I will note that they've calculated at a conservative rate they've calculated it based off of 75 square feet or one space per 75 square feet which is our our parking requirement for restaurant spaces um so I think that's probably one of the most conservative ways to count it because they could they could use a place of assembly calculation for certain areas um and that would probably reduce their overall parking demand place of assembly for instance is one space per 150 square feet or one per three seats restaurants one per two seats or one per seventy five square feet so I think they've they've done a conservative uh you know taking a certain conservative approach by using the restaurant rate um you know the lock coverage calculation would actually decrease in lot coverage it's at 79% on this site uh interestingly the ZBA granted a variance in 1991 which allows the board to kind of treat the entire mall even though they're individual parcels as one site for the purposes of setbacks and dimensional requirements and that was stipulated as part of that approval in 1991.

So aside from that I mean I think the big things there are the landscape and and the uh elevations I met with them earlier and you know they had uh we're receptive to several of the items that we raised there's some minor stuff that is missing on the site plan but you know certainly things that could be addressed and then Steve Purnow's review is is pending of course we do have staff uh comments outstanding so recommendation tonight would be to discuss the various items of the plan that are noted and um continuance would be the recommendation I would also just note real quick before I uh uh you know we talked about the hours of operation 1130 a.m to 2 a.m on weekends uh 1130 a.m to 12 a.m on weekdays uh Loretta's last call is expected to operate seven days a week uh and then they have they have varying hours so some of their hours do offset there's some residential butters uh beyond this on Pleasant Street so we always just try to be considerate of them uh when the sites are redeveloped so I would uh also note that thank you any members of the public like to speak on the plan go to the board comments yeah I like the plan um one comment though I think you're uh you need to get rid of six additional parking spaces to put exterior dining in front of game on uh there should be outdoor dining there why isn't there any you have them on the other side uh that's where I would want to sit is there a reason you didn't do that or I mean it's uh so with our Kings locations we've built beautiful patios but all the actions inside and so we can't get people to utilize the patios they want to be where the bowling is they want to be where the gaming is they want to be uh at the uh bar watching a game so uh so what you do is you put a giant screen outside for them to watch the game perfectly well we have it at Loretta's of course yes but um uh it's something we would consider obviously if the customers want it we're gonna do it we want to please our customers but we spent a lot of money on these other ones and they're just not utilized at all.

We want to please our customers.

But we spent a lot of money on these other ones, and they're just not utilized at all.

We just want to point out also that that there is a patio at Loretta's, you know, the same building other side, but I mean people want outside dining.

I mean, they they can do that at Loretta's at you know, seven days a week.

And and and that's where people tend to gravitate to.

You know, the the having the game on is just it's just not used.

That's that's the reason that it was changed.

It wasn't the six parking spaces.

Just so that there was an underlying logic to it.

Big screen.

So Mr.

Hash, did you have any comments?

Yes, please.

Uh Jacob, can you go to the slide that showed all the parking?

So they called it section C.

Yes.

Okay, first thing is on the top of my mind here is that area that's labeled C3.

Yes, if these numbers are included in this parking, uh that would do away of any plans, because at one point they had a plan to put a restaurant and retail in that slot.

Is that correct?

Way back when?

Uh I don't recall.

I I do recall that you know, Cinemark came in 2017, and then this was supposed to be repurposed.

I don't recall looking at that plan if it was to be developed on this site as well.

But it could have been but that would do away with any any hopes with developing on that section.

Well, they would uh similar to what I guess Cinemark did and then the the uh Dick's House of Sport did if they want to eliminate any parking spaces, and if they even wanted to redevelop and they had sufficient parking, they'd still have to come back to this board.

But that is what they did um, you know, because Cinemark, I'm sure relied on the parking spaces that were available uh that are now occupied by Dick's multi-purpose field, and then uh you know, obviously uh Cinemark itself occupies significant uh amount of surface parking that is eliminated.

Yeah, next question is is that cleared out spot there where it says the word site?

Yes, if I remember right, Cinemark put that in for excess parking.

We made him them do that.

Oh, back here, yes.

That that's for employee parking and the planning.

Or is that more up for grabs for the entire parcel?

I don't know how the agreement works.

I could look at what the site plan uh dictates from 2017, but I do know that it was required by the planning board when Cinemark was developed, which also included that 400 seat restaurant and retail use right here.

So it might have been sold.

Yeah, so I think those those two things are kind of like married together.

So if that's the case, if you go look that out, look that up because I foresee this site meaning that space more than Cinemark.

I think this site's gonna draw more people.

And you know, if that's the case, then we're gonna want to walk way across that mall road.

Uh they might be already.

Yeah, they do have I don't know.

Yeah, yeah.

But I'm not positive.

Yeah, this path right here uh connects so yes.

That connection that we're uh that I requested to the north would kind of close that loop.

So I don't know why some of these aren't loading, but um I never drive that yeah.

This right here I have no idea.

So this uh this sidewalk here terminates here and then connects to the uh overflow employee parking here.

So if you could just check on that and see if if that's who gets to use that.

Definitely gonna want to know that if they get to use it.

No, look.

That's it.

Can I make a couple comments based on the the review?

Please.

Um just a couple.

Uh the big thing is we're gonna meet with Jacob and we believe we can work all these things out.

But I just wanted to talk about uh the plannings, you know, we we will keep what's there.

We'll we'll take Jacob's lead on that.

We did talk about planters though, uh, because because there is some pinch points where you if you have plannings or too much landscaping, you can't get around the building on the on that from the sidewalk.

So we what they've utilized in the past is is planners, seasonal planners.

I think you know, it would be flowers in the summer and mums in the fall and evergreens in the winter.

So there's that added dimension, which we'll discuss with uh with Jacob regarding the um the granite curbing of uh that some views this isn't this isn't asphalt, it's gonna be concrete, so it's gonna it's not gonna deteriorate and and it it does give a nice crisp look if you if you if you look at some of those elevations you can see the the curbing in the concrete.

So uh again we'll be back.

Um we'll be back in uh January.

We will we will try to get everything, all the input we got tonight we will take into account.

We'll talk to Jacob and get something in.

Thank you.

Um just real quick, Jacob, uh Mr.

La Fontaine.

The um parking agreement for these different ownerships, is that among amongst you know, the owners?

So we do treat it as one, but do they have parking agreements similar to the one that we just heard?

I'm pretty sure that the Roxal Mall, there's probably some in the room who are better versed at this than I am, but um on that aspect on the private end.

Uh, but I I do think that they have shared parking agreements with Roxell Mall, who was the owner of the parent parcel.

Um, but maybe the applicant could speak better to that.

The answer is yes, there are agreements, but what we're looking at is uh there are so many common spaces around this lot that are that are considered to be open spaces, they're not assigned to one of one of the uh um retail uses uh that that you know that no one's alarmed by it as far as the other tenants go, and and uh our parking uh parking studies show that you know even at peak times there's there's ample parking.

Okay.

I I think just some clarity on the f on whether or not like let's just say the the mall gets the air up there, Keith Jones says you can't, you know, they pull away parking.

I I guess the question is is there a parking arrangement that this lot has with the mall or the owner of all the other C lots, I guess is the question.

There's a declaration in place between Dix and this parcel.

Dicks owned this parcel, they sold it off to uh the the Lions group to Salem Nim L LLC.

Um and yeah, it defines parking uh fields, but uh again that that was all worked out and uh they're they're concerned they have a chance to object to us privately, they have not done so, and and of course they have not seen the the final plan yet.

But but uh you know the data shows that we're in good shape.

Yeah.

Mr.

Lafontaine, I I'm just it I'm applying the same thing that we just did for Christian the Christian church that is here.

So we can talk about it later.

I don't think we'll figure it out, but as long as there's something in place that you know they maintain it.

Um I think the uh granite uh my own opinion, I think granite curbing uh uh casino Salem, uh Mr.

Lafontaine, do they have granite curving?

Did we require that?

Um I don't think so.

I think that we had curr uh concrete curve in uh casino salem, I think.

Okay.

I can verify that.

Um and then uh I think we did make a deal that uh we wouldn't send you to uh view shed um because you had some great designers and you would work with Jacob.

I would just say that the the the entrance, the main entrance to game one.

Um I'm not a designer, I can't tell you why the other one looks way much better, you know, a lot better than the other one.

Um but I will I will just say the other one looks a lot better than than the the latest rendition.

Um I do like the columns, you know, the addition of that, try to break up that you know facade a little bit.

Um but I uh from the planning board work with Mr.

Lafon for me work with Mr.

Lafontaine.

Um I think he has a really good feel and understands what you know what we're looking for.

But I wanted you to hear from somebody on the planning board that the that entrance um could use some additional uh work.

Um and then just last question was just uh lights um in that could impact the abutters.

I know we don't know size of signs, but there are there's a lot of lighting on the signs.

Um Mr.

La Fontaine is you uh engage in conversations, you know, you know, highlight anything that could potentially be a concern of the uh you know the butters um or I guess the uh residential development across the uh mall road there that's all Ms.

Collison.

Um is there a way for pedestrians to safely get um from Tuscan over to here?

You might have gone over that, but if you could point that out one more time.

Yeah, yeah.

Um and Joey, I don't think I mentioned it.

Um I believe that same crosswalk that um we had pointed out in that um plan bottom right um oh yeah, that one as well.

Um yes, on that left part, you go down the sidewalk, there's a crosswalk right there.

Um I apologize, I don't know how far Tuscan goes up to the right, but there is another crosswalk up farther to get to that other strip of parking as well.

Sure.

So you go across that that crosswalk um across Mall Road and um looking at the plan if you turn to the left you go you would go uh down that crosswalk down that um sidewalk over to where pressed is and cross over it pressed so if you go down this crosswalk again right you go revert back to this crosswalk you go on the plan to the right um how would you get over to Corsa you would um there's uh this is a um access two here slide two hasn't yeah but so Corsa would be over in this area so you can take it's probably easier if I show you in map geo but um you you can connect it there is a small gap you know which maybe the board could talk about whether or not it should be uh connected yeah I think I think there's uh it's a pretty simple connection to get you from Loretta's over to like the Hanover and um over to the um you know where um like Capitol Grill like there's a there's a very clean pathway for pedestrians to be able to get over to that area but not over to um to Corsa and Caro um which are the Dolbin buildings over at Tuscan.

So um and that's quite a bit of residential use over there and then I imagine that at some point in time there's gonna be something developed over where that parking garage is across the way um over in that vicinity there.

I don't know what it's going to be if if it's going to stay as it is in the master plan but regardless um there might be some additional foot traffic coming from that area there.

One one area that closed maybe the application I haven't discussed this with the applicant but this sidewalk is really to service the employee parking you know you we could discuss whether or not they could provide just you know closed lists here uh because that would be how uh residents from Corsa which are north here they would presumably come down through here and then you know I guess they could still do it this way and but nobody's gonna do that you know they they they'll go this way anyway.

Um sidewalk what's that is that a walkway there or is that just a path in the woods a it's a paved pathway yeah I did a two mile walk in towards kind of planners and we walked it the whole length but uh I I would explore making that connection it seems pretty simple to do.

Right there.

Um but yeah I think that would make a that would make a huge improvement for the residents over in the Dolbin buildings just to be able to to pop right over.

And is there lighting there Jacob sorry.

Yes there's a light here I don't think the rest of the pathway is illuminated but I think that's also probably on Tuscan property at at some point around this path here.

Yeah.

Um and then my other question was related to the dumpster um it looks like the dumpster is right along the building currently which is right next to the um the only outdoor patio um I imagine from a um operations perspective that probably isn't the best having people eating right next to a dumpster um it in in my mind I think that could be relocated somewhere else right next to it there's if you could come up to the mic sorry there's uh the patio and then an outdoor storage area and then the dumpsters is kind of the way it's contemplated right now so if that's not is that the I know it's noted as an equipment area.

I just I just can't really tell exactly how large it is.

Like is there is there really that much of a buffer between the patio area in the dumpster area.

Probably 15 feet or so yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

And the enclosure and it's enclosed that's why we're talking about both of them are enclosed.

Sure.

Separately so it isn't like both the equipment and the dumpster enclosed separately gotcha.

Okay.

Um yeah I mean then I I suppose I'm fine with that and then there's no issue with um turning the turning pattern for a trash truck to be able to get into the position that it's that it's currently designed in.

No there shouldn't be um I can get the um exact trash truck through um yeah some sort of a turning plan um definitely nothing crazy.

I think it just seems like it it could be a little bit tight with cars parked over here understanding that you know the dumpster's probably not being picked up when there's many people parked there but um you know for argument's sake I think it would be helpful to see um how that trash truck would turn we can have location currently um that's all I have.

Um the only thing I have to add is just um uh the landscaping and the uh the elevations and whatnot.

Uh just echo Jacob's concerns pretty much agreement in agreement with everything he had to say on the architecture.

Um parking, traffic.

I'm okay with the numbers, wait to hear uh from uh traffic consultant.

Um I I think we should see uh wish we should have uh view shed review um have an outside review.

I don't know, I know they want to get it in uh uh for the next uh review period.

I don't know if we can help push that through, but uh I don't know how the board feels, but I I I would like to see uh the uh view shed have that uh also uh outside design review.

Uh Ms.

Chair, I think um I I said this, but I want to make sure I'm accurate when I said this.

That we did we discussed at the last meeting uh when we heard this last whether or not we should have view shed review it.

Is that right, Mr.

Lafontaine?

Yeah, there was a discussion, and then uh the applicant did indicate that they would work with staff, but that it was discussed at that time.

They wanted to show off their architect.

They didn't have the chance.

If I if I could grab it, I per I personally I think we should have it, you know, what the board thinks so if I could, Mr.

Chairman.

I just wanted to say that at this meeting with Jacob, we will have gravity, yeah, our architectural, you know, on the meeting as well.

Okay.

So it isn't just gonna be turn around ideas.

We'll have them involved.

Um we'll ask staff.

I mean, Mr.

Lafontaine.

I mean, I I think you know, I think we've given them a chance, and they came back with something that I think is not quite quite as nice.

Do you feel comfortable down that path?

Uh you know, do you want to have a conversation first?

And yeah, I mean we had a productive conversation uh today, and and I think they heard the comments.

I mean, um, view sheds reviews always helpful.

I mean, to provide some you know insight and expertise, but um you know, I guess I'd really defer to the board.

I I think they were receptive to the comments.

I don't know.

Uh we're gonna go one by one view shed outside design review.

I say no, because the only the only problem I is the only uh I think I'm okay with Mr.

LaFontaine working it out.

No.

That's it.

Okay.

Board speaks.

All right.

But I think I do under uh I get some of the comments that you raise.

I mean, a term, and I think the applicant I would imagine.

We'll be mindful to your comments.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

With that uh that's all.

We'll entertain a motion.

Mr.

Chair, I move to continue the site plan.

Second uh motion of second to continue the site plan.

Any further discussion on this one?

Uh all those in favor, it's unanimous.

Thanks.

We'll see you next time.

Thank you.

I have a couple items of public matters.

I'm just trying to get through the other slides.

Um I know that some folks are here.

Let me pull up because I see members of the uh casino that are here.

So let me pull that up first.

Uh so included in your packet was a memo from Mark Gross on behalf of Casino Salem.

Uh Casino Salem has sold.

Uh it was permitted by Courtish companies who own the live casino brand.

It has since been purchased by Churchill Downs.

Uh so they've made some modifications.

It remains substantially the same, but uh, you know, they're they're really kind of taking the uh approved elevations and uh modifying them so that they're not branded for you know live casinos brand, and then also uh I think in in many regards kind of making it uh you know, maybe more of uh character, you know, the user materials I think are probably more regionally uh uh seen, I guess.

You know, I think it's maybe a little bit more reflective of what we've seen at Tuscan Village.

So we wanted to bring these back to you.

Uh and we did send them to our third-party design consultant.

Uh they've had a variety of comments back and forth.

They're real outstanding comments right now are relative to um the lighting plan, which was a condition of approval, which I think we could work out for phase two occupancy.

And then the other item that they had addressed was the affidavit for the artwork, and I think that's also something that uh I think it should be uh addressed as soon as possible.

And I think that's also something that I think it should be addressed as soon as possible, but I think it's something that we can work through at the staff level.

It says this letter serves to outline the minor revisions to phase two of the charitable gaming facility located at the former Lord and Taylor location at the mall at Rockenham Park.

Phase one is currently operating as part of the previously approved site plan.

We attached to the updated architectural and site plan documents for phase two of the projects, the minor changes for the phase two, and then he outlines the minor changes.

So these are the currently proposed elevations.

So again, everything remains pretty substantially the same in terms of the massing and the um you know the uh the way the building is is uh presented.

Uh this was I think this one probably helps the best because this is our existing condition.

This was the previously approved, and then this is what they are currently proposing.

So you'll note that it really stays substantially uh the same as what was approved, just change of materials and colors.

Um so again, this is the southern uh view, so this would be from Pleasant Street.

Um that does change uh and it's shown on the site plan is they're gonna propose to extend the canopy.

Uh so the canopy right now only extended over the sidewalk.

It's gonna go out beyond that, and that's to provide uh shelter for people who are being dropped off uh at the main entrance there.

Um so here again, this is from the park and garage uh view, existing condition, the approved, and then the proposed.

So again, I I think substantially the same.

Uh we did have it reviewed by our architect our uh third-party uh consultant view shed, and uh they didn't really raise any concerns about the modifications to the architecture they had concern, or they had comments rather about the landscaping, uh about the lighting, um, about a couple other things, but not really uh in terms of the architecture.

Here's a rendering that shows that uh uh revised architecture with the extended canopy here, another uh rendering.

Uh one thing the the restrictive affidavit is for this sign here, or artwork actually.

It was there's a lot of discussion about it.

You'll remember that when live came in, they were at one point proposing a digital display here, and it was going to be a digital artwork, which was looked an awful lot like a sign at one of their other locations, so I think it's probably appropriate uh and and a welcome modification that they're proposing.

Uh, you know, they're still gonna break up the facade, but they're gonna do it without kind of that digital uh component.

Um aside from that, uh they should have a site plan, and maybe it's not in this set.

One second.

Um I don't know if it's this one.

Nope, that's a separate one.

Um so it really the only modification to the to the site plan would be the extension of this canopy.

The canopy either probably encroached croches if there were to be a setback or extends beyond the actual lot line.

Uh, but again, similar to what was referred to in the last application at the mall in 1991, a variance was granted to treat the entire lot as one uh contiguous parcel for the purposes of setbacks.

Uh I think both parcels are owned by Roxal, but I guess you know we could ask them to submit something from the mall saying that they're okay with the modification of the canopy, but they're the property owner of both uh parcels, the parking lot associated with it, and then the actual uh anchor store as well.

So wanted to bring that to you, see if you had any concerns with the modifications.

Uh we also did have it reviewed by Steve Pernau because they are uh uh making some modifications to the programming, but all the pro uh all the modifications result in in uh in a decrease demand.

So, for instance, the game and seat count was reduced from uh 1340 to 1,039, and this is primarily due to the removal of a poker tables from the gaming floor.

The parking demand for the restaurant was a reduced from 235 spaces to 149 spaces, and this was due to a reduction in the square feet of the restaurant space, and they're proposing 298 seats.

So uh that was sent to Steve Pernau and Mr.

Per now agreed with the calculations, and um so that's really kind of it.

They're uh you know, I they're presented as minor revisions.

I wouldn't disagree with that.

I think the uh building is substantially the same, aside from change of color and the extension of the canopy.

Okay.

Good.

All right.

Aside from that, I'm trying to see if anybody else is here for these other items.

Uh Kim Co.

This is 92 Clough Crossing.

So recently you approved a application for uh BJ's wholesale to relocate to where Christmas, not where Christmas tree shops is where uh uh Planet Fitness and Bob store that length, and they're now looking to add a different uh another tenant space here.

So this was Christmas tree shops previously, it was all one space, and now they'll add a demise and wall here, and uh of course they want to add a new entryway to this location.

This location was shown as a fitness uh center, and I think that would be the location where Planet Fitness would relocate to.

I can't remember if that's been reviewed by the board or not, but um so this is the um existent elevations.

This is the demo, so they would look to remove some of these, this facade, and then this is the proposed.

So it actually uh if you go through, uh this is what ultimately they're proposing it as.

It looks a lot uh like the rest of the kind of architecture that you see, it kind of mimics this entryway that we used to be.

Christmas tree shops.

Um again, new uh facade here.

Um that's really kind of it, just a new entryway for them.

Didn't they come before us for uh approval to do some interior work on that on that location?

And I believe that permit's been issued kind of for tenant work.

Um so um they wanted to add this demise and wall, and at that time they were still before you uh for the for BJ's wholesale.

Uh you allowed them to proceed at risk uh for tenant work only, it's not uh you know, sorry, not tenant work, landlord work only.

So it's not for any specific tenant, it's uh work that Kimco is doing on their own to prepare this space to be tenanted, and the same with this uh area here.

They have indicated that it'd be a retail use, but they don't have any specific user for it.

Um but regardless of who the user is, the elevations would ultimately be as proposed.

So it would be this elevation with whatever tenant occupies it.

So that but what we had already approved doesn't include the separation of the spaces presently.

What you approved was really limited just to the demise and wall, the separation.

So they were creating the separation.

Yeah, yeah.

Um it depends on what the the use is.

I think that this space it was uh approved at a retail rate, which it historically has been.

This space was actually uh I think proposed as a um as like a gym uh or uh membership club, uh not wholesale membership, but you know, gym membership club rate here.

So um I think they kind of intentionally did that so that if they wanted to retain planet fitness, they could in that space.

But but this application or this uh request for site plan exemption is really limited just to the facade.

So no permit has come in to tenant either space yet.

Yeah, I don't have any concerns.

Okay.

Um go back here.

Uh this is uh shaking seafood, or I think that's what it's still called.

Yeah, um, you approved this change of use plan in 2019, maybe or somewhere around there.

And uh it was approved with a condition that the rooftop mechanical units that you can see here.

Still haven't done that?

Uh it's been some time.

Shut them down.

Yeah, yeah.

I think actually if you I I remember this plan, so and I haven't been on the board since 2019.

Well, you remember because they've come in for various requests to modify the I I remember the rooftop units, and I remember talking about the the fencing and screen.

This is data 21.

So maybe.

I guess maybe uh yeah, so 2021.

This is what they were originally approved as.

Um, and then they ultimately didn't want to go forward with that.

Uh you'll recall at some point uh they came in for um a proposal to put like a vinyl fence up there.

But they ran they ran into issues with the building department because of the wind uh uh wind load and uh the concern was that if you put something up there that comes flying off uh into 28 or in the parking lot, you know, that's not a good situation.

So um they've come up with an alternative, and they are essentially um the the request was included in your packet, but they didn't really have a mock-up uh of what they were proposing to do.

It's really uh just to extend kind of the existing facade, so up beyond this cap, they would have the kind of same uh material and colors and add a parapet more or less up to the top.

And uh I wanted to see if you were okay with that proposal.

It this is all for them to screen these rooftop units.

Yeah, so in our site plan regulations, we require any new rooftop mechanical units to be screened.

If you zoom in, I don't know if you care or not, but if you zoom in, those are actually uh camouflaged because uh literally painted with camouflage.

Yeah, uh, because I think at one point in time that was supposed to satisfy the condition of approval.

But um anyway, now they're kind of coming in, they're proposing to do a more permanent solution and build uh kind of a parapet that would reflect the materials and colors of the existing uh building.

So it won't necessarily be as coordinate here, but that's what they're uh requesting.

And I'm trying to find that request, but my packets get out of order.

Here we go.

Uh please see attached engineering plans with testing for addition of a parapet wall of four feet height by 170 linear feet in CMU with facade to be painted like the existing wrap on the top part of the building.

The cap will cut uh the cap cover uh will be the same as the existing aluminum cap and bronze color, and the back part of the wall will be in TPO material for weatherproofing and um what they have provided, and this is included in your packet, but I don't think I have it uh available here, is they've provided kind of a detail that shows uh the material and what they're proposing to do.

So um it calls uh I'm trying to just uh new C new 12-inch CMU.

So they're gonna do a CMU wall up to four feet tall up off the top of this here, um materials and colors.

One question is relative to you know where the wall would have to end, it's gonna wrap the entire length here.

So if you have that in your packet, it's what's highlighted in green, and then it goes uh uh shorter distance on the southern facade.

I would just go out and and ensure that it uh screens the new units.

I think there was one existing up there, but uh really we're trying to accomplish screening from uh from 28 and uh is that that's not Seed Street, whatever the seat uh street beyond C Street is maybe I can't remember.

I think so.

But so they are not the only property in town that's required to screen rooftop equipment.

Like what what does everyone else do?

And how was how like how do they handle it?

Yeah, this is not atypical.

I mean, Tuscan uh you know like they build a parapet and they put a fence on the parapet, like I know that's no a lot of times the parapet is tall enough so that it's obscures it.

There are some commercial properties that predate the requirement in our site plan regulations, so they may exist without screening.

So I know just the two off the top of my head is um whichever apartment building is across from Market Basket of Cuscans.

I don't know if it's COSA or Carol.

I always get too confused.

That's uh course.

They have a fence up on the roof.

Um and then um Matty's over um by McKinnon's.

Yeah, they also have that up on the roof, and uh there's definitely others, but I just can't think them up off the top of my head.

But in any case, I I don't understand.

Is it because the fact that those have parapets and they connect it to the parapet, and they can't and this is just a flat roof?

Like I don't this just seems to be a good one.

No, I mean they could do a number of ways.

I mean, it really kind of depends on how they wanted to proceed.

So at one point they wanted to proceed with the fence.

I think the board was okay with that, but subject to staff approvals.

The building department said we want an engineer to certify that this isn't gonna, you know, blow off into the uh into the right-of-way or in the parking lot.

Um so I mean there's number there's companies that specialize that just do this.

Um, sure, they can't just go screw a fence onto the roof and expect to stay put, like they would need to make it structurally sound and probably bring something in through the roof line, but I don't know.

That's yeah.

So it seems like a lot of expense to cheaper ways to screen it.

I would think this yeah, this feels a bit crazy.

But yeah, if they want to spend the money on it, by all means.

Okay, so the board's okay with their proposal to add the four foot CMU wall.

Okay.

Um this is a request from uh Sevmar.

So you recently approved a uh plan for an event center and uh lounge space at uh 357 South Broadway.

They haven't pulled any permits for that yet, but they don't anticipate to be open for a little while.

In the interim, they're hoping to add a food truck.

This site loves the planning board.

I know, yeah.

Yeah.

Is this the old Honda?

Like it's all every few months.

And then also a new puff lounge, a new toolers.

So um, you know, they they already have that site plan approval, but they wouldn't occupy it.

They're looking to uh potentially put a food truck uh in this location here um prior to occupancy of this space.

So I don't know I guess circulation is maybe okay in that area, but I don't have any consumer.

And you're okay with it, yeah.

Yeah, we can't space like a legal in space, they do weddings and stuff.

Yeah, well, I I I think you board the board would probably want to condition that it be uh subject to you know that it would discontinue at time of occupancy because you'll recall that they had a pretty significant conditional use permit um and they have off site parking agreements that they need to submit.

So I I think you know, if they have 5100 square feet that is going to be vacant, uh you know I'm sure they'll be able to do that.

Yeah, and if it's an event space, there's not gonna be enough parking anyways.

I mean, I I think I would be fine with conditioning it to expire at the time of occupancy.

I think the million dollar question is is where they plan on putting that truck once they get occupancy.

Um how many spots is that gonna tie up right there?

I mean, they also have they have 401 main street, and then they have um uh the a the ADP yeah, where's 401?

Uh that's the 97 from Dunkin' Donuts.

On the Methuan line.

There's an Roma Joe's that's over there.

Oh right, right.

Yeah.

So I mean they have that location over there, and then they also have a I just want to make sure it's not here.

Yeah, it I'm obviously I have no idea what they're planning on doing, but I imagine that they have other locations like the ADP they got one of the thought to the U condition it that it needs to be removed for the certificate of occupancy.

Yes, yeah, okay, yeah.

I mean, I think if if they get 5100 square feet vacant, I'm sure they can accommodate the parking demand.

They did submit a uh email and that was forwarded to you, uh, but it just outlines kind of their their hours, their proposed hours of operation and um you know what the products that they intend to sell are.

Um and they submitted a site sketch.

So I think it just says hours of operation are 11 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

Uh customer pickup only, no seating, no tables, no chairs, trailers fully remove uh removable, seasonal, and remains on existing pavement.

The location does not impact required parking.

Uh well, because the business is vacant, I guess.

Um internal circulation.

So they had the food truck at the Christmas lighting.

Yes, and they and they noted that I guess that was kind of their dry run with it, and it sounded like it was very successful and they wanted to potentially nightmare.

Yeah.

Oh just saying the Christmas lighting.

I was the the whole thing was a nightmare.

Okay.

It was so many people though.

So planning board matters only, thank you.

Um I don't have anything further.

I just acknowledge that we do have uh call for candidates.

So if anybody's interested in me and alternate, please reach out.

The planning board's not gonna meet on December 23rd.

We'll meet again January 13th.

Um I think that's about it.

I I in the meantime I'm gonna try to keep busy with the RFQ and then the zoning amendments, and I'm sure I've got a uh other items too.

Uh we're gonna try to come back to the cigar bar and then a couple of other zoning amendments uh as well.

Um there's food trucks on that list.

We had a food truck uh ordinance.

I'll I'm happy to recirculate it.

I think when I shared it with the board, the consensus consensus ended up being that let's do it the way we've traditionally done it, but I'm happy to take another stab at it.

I think it oh, it's easy like this.

Okay, that way they don't know that's fine.

I think they go through all the red tape of of put to an assignment.

That's just it's too much for a food truck.

Yeah, well, we had a an ordinance that was gonna be like an administrative approval.

What ends up hanging people up is the parking because obviously the food typically the food truck wants to occupy parking spaces.

You know, we don't apply any parking demand for the food truck.

Uh you know, so those are some of the items that we talked about.

So uh I'm happy to send that back out though when we could see if you want to adopt it so that it could be an administrative process.

Um or think what we're doing works.

Okay.

Good.

I I'm I'm generally fine with doing it how we're doing, but um if there are any other municipalities near us that have any sort of food truck ordinance for us to consider, perhaps we at least take a look at that.

Sure.

At how they handle it.

Yep.

Um not that we necessarily need to adopt anything, but I think it would be helpful just to see what surrounding communities are doing.

Low did.

I know that.

Okay.

Maybe want to check with them.

But that's they're a big city.

So motion to adjourn.

Oh, I'm saying.

Second.

I thought we did.

You got a motion to second all those in favor?

Yep.

Okay.

Thanks.