Salem Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
March 20, 2008
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 20, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Christine Sullivan, Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Pam Lombardini, Gene Collins. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk.
Absent: John Moustakis
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the February 21st meeting were reviewed. There were no changes, a motion was made by Walter Power to accept the minutes, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0).
(Pam and Gene were not present/missed part of the last meeting and did not vote in the approval of the minutes).
Public Hearing Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) –Attorney Scott Grover
Attorney Joseph Correnti explained that the plans for this project for the Old Salem Jail are being amended due to finances and some required meetings with the city are presently being held. He commented that the plans are turning out to be better than the ones previously approved. He felt that until they complete the meetings with City Departments, they should wait to make their presentation to the Planning Board. They are requesting an extension so that they can present to the Board when the plans and meetings are complete. There is a formal letter from New Boston Ventures that was sent to the Planning Department requesting this extension.
There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to move the public hearing to April 3, 2008, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
Old Business
· Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street- Attorney Joseph Correnti
Attorney Joseph Correnti explained that the project is fully permitted, but not fully financed. There is a lender that they have been working with closely, and may come through in the spring. They are requesting a six-month extension to keep the project permitted; nothing will change about the project.
There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to grant the six (6) month extension, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (8-0).
Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage- 90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493)- John Donahue
John Donahue explained that he wants to move the house at 60 Federal Street to a lot on Downing Street. He was granted the necessary variances from the Board of Appeals. He is requesting a waiver of frontage so that it can be divided into two parcels. Moving the house and then restoring it will preserve Salem’s history.
Meeting opened to the public
Betsy Burns (22 Beckford Street) speaking for the Federal St. Neighborhood Association, they strongly agree with John Donahue's project. The house is from yr. 1818 and this will save a piece of Salem’s history and she hope the Board supports this proposal.
Steve Robinson (1 Downing Street) opposes the plan due to shortage of on street parking. The waiver of frontage would eliminate an on street parking spot on Downing Street. Putting an additional house would add more cars, adding to the already existing parking problems. He is also concerned about the fire hazard this home will create in an already congested neighborhood.
David Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) supports John Donahue's proposal and thinks it will enhance the neighborhood, he hopes the project goes through.
Chuck Puleo pointed out the Zoning Board of Appeals decision included a condition that states that the house may not be changed in any way.
Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) believes the Zoning Ordinance enforces the same thing.
Walter Power asked how the move is going to be accommodated. John Donahue explained that they determined that the route least limited by obstructions is through downtown. The move would take place most likely on a Sunday. The mover is pretty certain he can get it to Downing Street in one day. There will be police details; there is some wiring that needs to be moved- all pending City approval. The City and mover will meet to plan the move.
Robert Femino (32 Endicott St) representing his father Mr. Femino (120-124 Margin St., at the corner of Downing Street and Margin Street). His property abuts the property being discussed. He doesn't want to be boxed in with an old structure, as the house would be about 6-10 ft away from his. The Zoning Board said there used to be a structure there that burned down 94 years ago, and that you have two years to replace such a structure. Robert Femino suggested that since the structure wasn’t replaced, perhaps it was because they realized it wasn't a good fit. This has already been before the Zoning Board and Mr. Femino said they felt that Mr. Donahue is burdened with owning a lot of property. He feels the property is not a hardship; he’s going to sell the house and much of the land.
These are two substandard, nonconforming lots and it comes at the expense of the neighborhood. His father is 91 years old and has been a taxpayer in Salem for years. He mentioned he had submitted a petition against the proposal to the City. He asked that the Board reject the request.
Amy Lash passed around two petitions submitted at the time of the Board of Appeals public hearing, for and against this proposal.
Economic Development Planner, Tom Daniel, mentioned that Lynn Duncan was unable to attend and he was there representing the Department of Planning and Community to say that the City is in support of this project. They looked at alternative sites, but feel this is the best site for the house. He emphasized that the character and details of the house shall be maintained.
Chuck Puleo asked if the lot was considered one lot and when it had merged. Tom Daniel said it was two lots, then after the fire, it was merged to one lot.
Betsy Burns said she is in sympathy with Mr. Femino, speaking for herself, she concurs with his opposition. She is surprised that the City would allow for so many variances. Although she wants the house to be saved, the neighbor shouldn't suffer.
Christine Sullivan said that this request for waiver of frontage seems to have two issues: preserving the house and parking issues. She is on the "preserve the house" side even though parking is an issue. Most of the city has parking issues. Nadine Hanscom wanted clarification for the approval of the waiver, whether it’s needed to continue the project. Tim Kavanaugh explained that John Donahue needs the waiver for frontage so that the lot can be separated and built on. If the waiver isn't granted, the lot cannot be separated. Issues similar to this one have occurred in the past and the Board granted the waiver. This is a congested neighborhood with undersized lots, but he has already received the necessary variances.
Amy Lash read a letter from Historic Salem who approves the proposed project and hopes it goes through. They feel the house keeps with the character of the neighborhood.
Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) was at the Zoning Meeting when the issues for this project came up. Mr. Femino and Mr. Robinson are on the corners of the street (multi family homes), they are in need of parking. Councillor Pelletier is on the fence for this project. He thinks it is a good fit for the neighborhood and it is only going to be a single-family home, but he also respects the families on that street.
Mr. Robinson said that in between the two four-family homes are more multi-family homes. Mr. Femino added that they are appealing what the Zoning Board ruled last week.
There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to close the public hearing, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (7-0).
Walter Power said he feels for both sides. The overcrowding is a tough issue and he doesn't completely agree with losing some historic homes to the new courthouse. Nadine Hanscom is concerned with the fact that there have been similar cases like this one and the waivers were granted. She feels the Board can't pick and choose who should get waivers when the same circumstances are present, it wouldn't be fair. Pam Lombardini agreed with Nadine in that it's about fairness.
Chuck Puleo reiterated that it will be a single-family home, it can't be changed, and a parking space will be on the property. Tim Ready commended Mr. Femino and the neighbors on their comments but that the decision for the Planning Board is the frontage. Tim Kavanaugh said in the previous two cases, they determined the waiver of frontage to be allowed under the subdivision control law.
There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to grant the waiver of frontage, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493) - John Donahue
There being no comments on this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to accept the application, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (8-0).
Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 217 Essex Street (Map 35, Lot 251) (Eastern Bank) - Sprint Wireless Broadband
Attorney Rick Sousa said that Sprint has operated a wireless network installation on top of the bank since 1999. They want to upgrade 3 of the 6 antennas and add one wireless dish, which is about 2 feet in diameter. Sprint is upgrading their network to offer high-speed wireless access and they are utilizing the site of already existing antennas. The dish will allow them to transmit from the antennas to another site.
Pam Lombardini confirmed that they are just adding a dish, the rest are replacements. Christine Sullivan asked if Sprint would be providing free access to downtown as a benefit. They could offer it in return for using the building and then take credit for it. Tim Kavanaugh said if there were a business district, it would make sense to offer that. Rick Sousa said that it will be offered to Sprint customers and that it's a gradual process, they're swapping out first. When the network has significant amount of subscribers, they would add more. Walter Power mentioned that another wireless company came in recently with a backup technology. Amy Lash said the name of the company was FiberTower. Rick Sousa said that is a different type of company and Sprint is expanding so that it doesn’t have to rely on those companies.
Meeting Opened to the Public
David Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) said on top of Eastern Bank, where they have the antennas, there was a wire from the civil defense horn to Old Town Hall. He asked if while Sprint is there –could they hook the wire back up for that horn? Mark Sousa said they’ll be using licensed electricians and it wouldn't be a problem to do that.
Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) appreciated what Christine Sullivan said about the City getting something in return for companies using buildings for such purposes, so he plans to put in an ordinance for this to happen. Mark Sousa suggested that the City put out an RFP to wireless carriers making available City properties for wireless facilities.
Carol Magulies (99 Washington Street) asked if the dish going on the roof emits radio frequencies, and how it affects people in the neighboring area? Phil Leite explained that the FCC places strict limitations on emissions. Sprints' emissions are 20% of the maximum allowed, which is a lot less than the FCC maximum. Mark Sousa said it doesn't impact health and explained that the signal dissipates once it leaves the tower. Also, it can’t go thru stone walls. Sprint will provide the copy of the FCC regulations, the scientific information and affidavit to Amy Lash in the Planning Department, who will pass it on to Carol Magulies, she can distribute in her building.
There being no further comments on this matter, Gene Collins made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Walter Power, and approved (7-0).
Christine Sullivan asked for Dave Pelletier's request for the civil defense horn hook-up to be in writing and asked what is needed to hook it up. She would also like the SRA to be aware of this as well. Dave Pelletier said just a 14-gauge zip cord is needed. Condition #3 to be added: "Applicant to install a 150 ft. zip cord line connected to the former Civil Defense horn on top of the building, and coil it 10 ft. above the ground, subject to Eastern Bank approval." Councillor Pelletier will talk to Eastern Bank.
There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the Special Permit, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (8-0).
Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 &97) (formerly Salem Suede) - Attorney Scott Grover
Attorney Bill Quinn, filling in for Scott Grover, explained that they would like to address questions from the Board as well as traffic concerns. The Planning Board asked for a streetscape but he didn't have that because they haven't come up with renderings that they were happy with, they are trying different options for the renderings and want it to give views desired. They plan to bring them to the next meeting.
Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect (Huntress & Associates) explained the landscape plan: around the perimeter of the property there are shade trees (ash, maple & oak) and evergreens to provide buffering and screening. There are also ornamental trees. The walkway to the north of the river canal there are benches and ornamental lights. Significant foundation plants around buildings are provided. There are street trees along Mason Street. There are two different types of lighting used: the shoebox type that directs light downward and ornamental/traditional lighting. There are benches along the walkway and interior of the backside of the building.
Chuck Puleo asked if there would be fencing along the Flint Street properties. There will be fencing at the perimeter of the site, starting at Flint Street, going down the sidewalk and across the back. Chuck Puleo pointed out the gap between #73 Mason St & #65 Mason St. and said there should be some type of screening. Attorney Bill Quinn will bring in details of landscaping, elevation and fencing, including the type of fencing and height. Chuck Puleo said they want to make sure that there will be some type of screening that won’t take many years to grow. Chris Huntress said the fence will be on the developer’s property and they will maintain it. There would not be a fence along the waterway.
Christine Sullivan asked about the color of the lights and since Chris Huntress said they would be white, she wondered how they would look in that neighborhood; they may not be very attractive. Chris Huntress said there is a proposed walkway with lighting and a bench near the river and that it's where it is because the easement is there, it can however be moved. He also said the shoebox lights are utilitarian and the poles are painted black so that they fade into the landscape. If they used the ornamental type, they would have to use more because of how the light is dispersed. Chuck Puleo asked if the driveway coming in from Flint St. would be one of the main entranceways. If so, is lighting adequate? Attorney Quinn said it does have adequate lighting. Christine Sullivan asked if this needs
to go before the Design Review Board, and Attorney Quinn said they're getting ready to do that.
Walter Power asked if they have established illumination levels for foot-candle coverage. Chris Huntress will present analysis on this. Walter Power also inquired about the green strip and property line on the plan and Chris Huntress said the white area on the plan is not their property. Walter Power questioned if there are any problems with that area (from the canal back). This information would be useful if the City planned to extend Commercial Street in the future. Attorney Quinn the property goes down to the North River Canal and there’s an easement across that area.
Chuck Puleo asked if there will be any lighting on the building, Attorney Quinn said that there would be and they will present this at the next meeting. Tim Ready pointed out that on the drawing, on the right side of the 51-unit building there is a walkway with lines. Chris Huntress explained that the lines denote a retaining wall and there is no projected walkway from one end of the building to the other.
Meeting Opened to the Public
Dave Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) suggested they use the city standard historic lamp pole, which replaced the lights downtown. They're brighter than shoebox lights, flexible and would be more uniform with the other lights in the park across the river.
Jean Arlander (Federal Street) asked how many trees would be planted, as the NRCC parking requirements are specific: 1 tree of at least 3 ½ caliper, for every 3 parking spaces. Chris said they can look at the number of trees on the plan and try to meet the requirements.
Nick Nowak (356 Essex Street) asked if the flood lines and types of plantings were taken into account and Chris Huntress explained that they did and the plantings are of native species.
Betsy Barnes (22 Beckford Street) asked if this project is being held to the original NRCC master plan, in terms of lighting and landscaping. Christine Sullivan suggested that although there are variances, the developer is not exempt from compliance with these requirements.
Darrow Lebovici (122 Federal Street) said that the NRCC Master Plan and ordinance reflects how the area should evolve. Clusters of townhouses were proposed but this proposal shows 3 block like buildings. Chuck Puleo said that right now the Board is looking at what the developer is proposing, whether it complies or not is separate. Attorney Quinn said he'd look at the Master Plan and see how they can comply, or request a waiver. Christine Sullivan asked what has been approved by the Zoning Board and Attorney Quinn explained that elevations, plans, location of building, lot coverage, footprints and height of building were all presented to the ZBA and they gave 3 variances including the density, construction in the buffer zone, and the requirements for first floor entrances. The plan is now subject to
the review of the Planning Board, Design Review Board, and Conservation Commission.
Pam Lombardini reminded all that the issues are they are discussing are lighting and planting. Chuck Puleo restated that Attorney Quinn said they would comply with the plan, or apply for waivers.
Dave Pelletier was at the ZBA meeting and said that the building hasn't been approved yet (the footprint) so he feels the Board is talking about landscaping for buildings that aren't definite. Tim Ready offered that there is a proposal before the Board and these are the steps they have to go through. David Ziom, one of the developers, added that they originally came in proposing 160 units and have made modifications to the buildings with the help of the neighborhood and Board of Appeals. Councillor Pelletier added that he was involved with the NRCC and was opposed because of the process, but he wants the project to go through for the betterment of the City. When Christine Sullivan was on the SRA, they would look at a plan, take into account the ZBA, and send it to the DRB. She feels this discussion is a
bit premature and suggests deferring this to the DRB. Chuck Puleo added that the DRB will be looking at the NRCC Master Plan.
Betsy Barnes asked the Board, when looking at the plan, to consider the parking. The Master Plan suggests parking be contained inside, instead of seeing mass parking, as people would see from the streets. Jean Arlander said the NRCC called for mostly commercial with some residential for this area, this project has it the opposite way, so it should need a special permit. Attorney Quinn said that they have requested one.
Jeff Maxter, Traffic Engineer (EarthTech) presented the traffic analysis that looked at present and future conditions. They conducted accident research and found that there are geometric issues with this area. They looked at the 5-year analysis and added a percentage of growth and looked at peak hours. This project will generate 56 trips in the morning peak hour, less than 1 vehicle per minute; 87 trips in the afternoon peak hour, a little more than 1 vehicle per minute. They conducted level of service analysis, 2 areas of concern: Tremont Street southbound and Flint Street northbound, he feels this project won't exacerbate these too much. Site drives are on Mason Street and Flint Street; they agree on the easement; they suggest a flashing beacon for traffic; BETA suggested signalizing the
intersection, EarthTech suggested making a divided lane.
Chuck Puleo questioned if they are proposing two-way traffic on both entrances? Jeff Maxter said yes. Did the studies show higher numbers on Flint or Mason, and if they're proposing a two-way turn on Tremont, won't they be blocking the Mason Street turn? The additional 12 parking spaces on Flint Street are for those at the top, left of Flint St. Walter Power suggested they consider putting a one-way lane on right hand side of the entrance Mason Street. Christine Sullivan thinks that people will mostly use the Flint Street entrance because most of the parking is concentrated near there. Also, because of school there is a peak time between 2-3, study should be done if it hasn't already, Jeff Maxter said they would provide data for that hour.
Richard Laperchia (79 Oak St.) asked the date of the study; Jeff said that it was September 2007, when school was in session. He suggested that the residents wouldn’t use the 12 parking spaces, because it will be difficult to park with kids, groceries, etc. Dave Pelletier feels that with this project, Flint Street won’t get fixed. They should plan for the future and take care of Flint Street first, then plan the buildings around it, and comp the developer for being involved in the process.
Ken Petralia, Peer Review (BETA Group) said the report by EarthTech was very professional. He outlined areas that need to be concentrated on:
· Internal capture rate- how many trips from one to another building within the development. EarthTech used 28%, BETA disagrees with that.
· Journey to work data- they've asked for more data.
· Intersection of Bridge & Flint St. They feel if there's a cue, it could block Oak Street. BETA suggests timing of signals or maybe a stripe for a left turn lane on that part of Flint Street.
· Intersection of Tremont & Mason, discussion of widening. They don't think it will help, if you widen it, it wouldn't provide a wide-enough lane to turn. It's a high accident area. There is also poor sight distance- when you have this, it's best to put in signals, in conjunction with site egress.
· In terms of measuring site distance, they disagree with the measurement from the road; there are issues with safe stopping distance.
· EarthTech is going to talk to the Fire Department about the turns. Signals at Tremont -others thought it would cause more traffic, BETA feels it may be less partly because drivers tend to avoid traffic signals.
All this information has been presented in writing. Ken hasn't seen a mitigation plan, it should be part of the final plan. Jeff said in the Master Plan, it did talk about a signal, he thinks there are issues with the City to recommend the signal.
Attorney Quinn wants this to work for the neighborhoods sake, they'll look at everything to see what they can comply with and will get the analysis to the Planning Department.
Dave Pelletier thinks that if they put a traffic signal in, Dunlop Street will get pretty popular. Rich Laperchia asked if anyone looked at the Oak Street traffic and thought that a left turn lane on Flint Street, would add to the cue. Jeff Maxter said if you stripe in a third turn lane, it will keep it down.
There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made to continue the Public Hearing to April 3, 2008 by Nadine Hanscom, seconded by Gene Collins and approved (8-0).
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Walter Power to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (8-0).
The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Stacey Dupuis, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| 
