A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and the Planning Board was held in the Council Chamber on Thursday, March 16, 2006 at 6:00 P.M. for the purpose of discussing a proposed Zoning Amendment and map by rezoning the property located at 110 Boston Street (Endicott School) from R-2 (two family residential) to R-3 (multi family residential). Notice of this meeting was posted on March 10, 2006 at 11:14 A.M. and advertised in the Salem Evening News on March 2nd and 9th, 2006.
Councillor Lovely was recorded as absent. Councillor Furey arrived late at 6:25 P.M.
President Jean M. Pelletier presided.
On the matter of the proposed Zoning Amendment rezoning the parcel located at 110 Boston Street making it R-3 (Multi-family residential).
Council President Pelletier opened the meeting by asking the City Planner Lynn Duncan to make a presentation and introduced Mr. Walter B. Power III chairman of the Planning Board.
Mr. Power introduced the other members of the Planning Board that were present, Pamela Lombardini, John Moustakis, Timothy Ready, Timothy Kavanaugh and arriving late Gene Collins.
Ms. Duncan stated that she looked for the best reuse of this parcel. Beaver Street and Boston Street density were looked at along with information received from the Assessor. It is an older neighborhood and it’s 2,200 square feet per unit which doesn’t even meet today’s current zoning which is 7,500 square feet per unit. This property could be a mixed use of business and residential or could be rezoned totally as residential that’s why this proposed zoning is before us tonight.
At it’s current zoning it would only allow for 3 units, if it is rezoned as R3 it would allow for 6 units. And it would require under the current zoning 1 ½ parking spaces per unit.
Councillor Pelletier asked what the frontage is for this property.
Ms. Duncan stated she believed it could be 100 ft. frontage and 125 ft. in the rear.
Councillor Sargent asked what is the square footage of the property.
Ms. Duncan stated 23,087 square feet.
Councillor Sargent stated he knew R-2 and R-3 and what’s allowed but with a variance R-2 could get as much as R-3. He stated his concern about commercial access from Beaver Street. He stated he didn’t want to see any parking or deliveries from the Beaver Street side of the property that it should only be done from the Boston Street side.
Ms. Duncan stated that this can be controlled.
Councillor Sargent still stated his concern that there will be more access on Beaver Street for Commercial business.
Ms. Duncan the initial proposal was to rezone the entire property as R-3 so it would be entirely residential.
Councillor Sargent stated he’s still concerned that this leaves it open for a PUD to be done. He used the example of the Stop and Shop site was supposed to be more like the Derby Wharf area but due to a PUD it doesn’t even resemble what the spirit of a PUD as written.
Councillor O’Leary asked who owns the middle? Right of ways for school.
Ms. Duncan stated she believed this was an alley way and wasn’t sure.
Councillor Sosnowski asked in talking with the neighborhood groups is there a master plan?
Councillor O’Leary stated we don’t have a master plan for the area. They have to go by the zoning for an Entrance Corridor.
Ms. Duncan stated that as of right now this is on the Entrance Corridor.
Councillor Sosnowski asked if we change zoning and allow 6 units and business or just 6 units.
Ms. Duncan stated that it was a good question and would need the expertise of the zoning officer.
Councillor Sosnowski asked if they could put restrictions to preserve the neighborhood.
Ms. Duncan stated she would look into a PUD for this lot.
Councillor Sargent stated you need to really see what’s allowed for R-3
Councillor O’Keefe asked if we adopt this how will the zoning impact this area?
Ms. Duncan stated that any new construction on an Entrance Corridor is limited.
Councillor O’Keefe asked where does the line form on the map for the Entrance Corridor?
Ms. Duncan stated 150 feet. There’s a reason why the city assets are being sold and we’re looking at what’s compatible with the neighborhood. The price is not the sole criteria for choosing a developer.
Councillor Sargent approached the map and stated again his concerns regarding the Beaver Street side of the property and the impact on the neighborhood.
Ms. Duncan comment was with the current zoning the potential for the Councillors concern for the type of development exists. In rezoning the site to R-3 and the square footage of this property it doesn’t meet the requirement for a PUD. It cannot be done on anything smaller that 60,000 square feet. This parcel is city owned not privately owned which gives control to this.
Councillor Bencal commented that in the past a gas station on Boston Street that abuts Beaver Street is not a good neighbor and doesn’t keep the area clean. And this parcel the city has more control over.
Councillor O’Keefe asked if there is a minimum price for the property?
Ms. Duncan state $650,000.00 but want to waive this price in order to get the highest and best use for this property.
Councillor Veno talked about the criteria for the RFP. And what is the criteria and how is the selection process done and who does it?
Ms. Duncan stated that the Planning Department makes the recommendation to the Mayor. A developer who has cash up front ranks high along with the ability to do the project and what the proposed use would be.
Councillor Veno asked how would you categorize the walk through?
Ms. Duncan stated that there were six interested parties so far.
Councillor Prevey asked if a developer submitted a proposal how detailed would that proposal need to be?
Ms. Duncan the proposal should give a clear indication of the developer intent for the property.
Councillor O’Leary moved to open the Public Hearing to the audience. It was so voted.
There was no one in favor in the audience.
Owner of property 52 – 54 Beaver Street stated his opposition to rezoning. He stated that this area was rezoned in 1960 when there was a big tannery that burnt down. Beaver Street was so narrow they couldn’t get a fire truck down it to put out the fire. That’s why in 1960 the zoning was changed from R-3 to R-2 to control it. We need to know what the uses for the property are because Beaver Street can’t support anymore traffic.
Mr. James Moskovis asked if the Beaver Street side would be R-3
Ms. Duncan stated the front is currently B-2 and the rear is R-2.
Mr. Moskovis asked if it could be changed in the front to R-3?
Ms. Duncan state that hearing these concerns we may discuss zoning the parcel entirely as R-3.
Mr. Ronald Pare of 114 Boston Street – Direct abutter to the parcel. Against this project the neighborhood is to dense. In the winter as it is there is nowhere to park.
Mr. Gene Collins of the Planning Board stated it was a good idea that there is public input.
Ms. Duncan stated provision in zoning to line back 30 feet for a buffer zone. There is no perfect solution this is a complicated property.
Councillor Bencal asked when the RFP’s are due back.
Ms. Duncan stated the deadline is March 29th.
Councillor Bencal stated there is additional protection with the RFP.
Councillor O’Leary moved that the Hearing be closed. It was so voted.
Councillor O’Leary moved that the matter be referred to the Planning Board for a recommendation. It was so voted by unanimous roll call vote of 10 yeas, 0 nays, 1 absent. Councillor Lovely was recorded as absent.
Counllior O’Leary moved that the hearing be adjourned at 7:05 P.M.
ATTEST: CHERYL A. LAPOINTE
CITY CLERK
| 
