Salem Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
April 3, 2008
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 3, 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, and John Moustakis. Also present were: Lynn Duncan, Director, Planning & Development; Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the March 20th meeting were reviewed. There were no changes. A motion was made by Gene Collins to accept the minutes, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
Request for Plan Endorsement and Execution of Covenant- Chapel Hill Subdivision, Clark Avenue- Attorney Jack Keilty
Attorney Keilty had several sheets of plans and a covenant that require signatures by Board members. One condition to be met is to change the sloped granite, but since that detail hadn't been changed on the appropriate sheet yet, that won't be endorsed at this time. They’ll bring it in for separate endorsement. Attorney Keilty informed the Board that they still have to go before land court.
There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to endorse the plans and execute of covenant, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (8-0). Christine Sullivan recused herself on this matter.
Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans- Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179)- Attorney Joseph Correnti
Attorney Joseph Correnti (63 Federal St.) representing Old Salem Ventures explained that in December 2006, the Planning Board unanimously approved the site plan review for the jail site, now they're back with amendments to that plan. Currently, the SRA holds the title to the project. Penn Lindsay of New Boston Ventures (NBV) said that they applied for federal and state credits, which will provide 40% of construction costs. These tax credits require historical buildings to have apartments, not condominiums. The jail building and jail keeper’s house (Macintyre and Bryant buildings) will have apartments for rent for five years, and then they will be converted to condos. The new Alexander building will have condos. There will be 36 units altogether- 22 rental and 14 condos. This
proposal is the same as originally presented to the SRA and they are still proposing a restaurant on site, exhibit space and artist workspace.
A 3-D model and drawings were presented to the Board. Daniel Ricciarelli explained that parking is in the same location, as is the access, drop off, the restaurant, etc. What they changed is the shape of the building- it will be an L-shaped building with the bottom of the building carved out for parking. The building will hug the streetscape like other buildings in Salem; outside exterior remains the same as well as the height. There are 5 additional units in this building, all flats. Gene Collins asked where the building comes to on St. Peter Street and Daniel Ricciarelli explained that it’s about a five-foot setback to match the other building. The materials are the same as what has been approved.
Chuck Puleo inquired about the status with the Fire Department. Penn Lindsay said they are working out the issue, which is that the Fire Dept. isn't totally comfortable with the entrance into the building. Access onto the site hasn't changed much so they’re optimistic they can resolve this over the next few weeks. Penn Lindsay said they have been to the DRB, commenting that they liked this plan better than the first. They have received schematic approval. Walter Power inquired if the new entrance will have a gated door. Penn Lindsay answered no, that they anticipate an archway with granite pillars and a window over the archway.
Since they’ve increased the number of units, John Moustakis asked for parking information and Penn explained that there will be 36 parking spaces (1:1 ratio). Amy Lash referred to the SRA minutes that state that NBV will lease 7 spaces in the garage for resident’s use, and for use of the residents of the senior housing, 5 additional spaces in the municipal garage for the period of construction. John Moustakis wondered where restaurant and exhibit patrons will park, Penn Lindsay said they can use the garage, optional valet parking and anticipates a lot of foot traffic. He mentioned that their target market are those who want to be near downtown, near a train, and will have less vehicles. In response to Gene Collins, Lynn Duncan explained that this is a B5 zone and the renovation of the
jail/jailhouse requires no parking. Lynn Duncan commented that with leasing spaces in the garage, they go above and beyond requirements. John Moustakis commented that parking passes don't guarantee a space. Gene Collins said that the Board can't change the parking issues since it's a B5 zone.
Christine Sullivan asked if they have a restaurant yet, if not, can they guarantee one. Penn said they don't have one yet, they will guarantee one and when they are actually in construction, they will get a restaurant partner. He hopes they will break ground sometime in June. Chuck Puleo added that they are waiting final approval from the Fire Dept and the SRA. In regards to the 22 rentals for 5 years, Gene Collins wanted to know how many are affordable units. He suggested that a 5-year term is short, how about 4 or 5 affordable units? Penn Lindsay said that due to the complexity and expense of renovations, as of now there will be 1 affordable unit.
There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to continue the Public Hearing to April 17th, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (9-0).
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 Scott Grover explained that there are two issues to clear to go forward: 1. Special permit for use of property, for the Board to approve this they must find that three requirements are met: A. It abuts a residential area (this has been met) B. Retain first floor use on main corridor (Mason St. is one) C. For all newly constructed units, each must have separate entrance, for this, they have a variance from the ZBA. 2. Site plan review process is enhanced by the Board making a decision based on NRCC, consistency with the Masterplan, which says it should be used for mixed use (the project is mixed use). John Moustakis asked if they could have a walkway. Attorney Grover spoke with Chris Huntress who said they can put a walkway from Mason down the right side of the site. They'll be
meeting on April 23rd with the design review Board. Chuck Puleo said the DRB would be commenting on the plans as well. Attorney Grover added that Chapter 91 states to keep areas approximate to tide lands open to the public. Christine Sullivan would like the Board's concerns communicated to the DRB and Lynn Duncan suggested there could be a couple of Board representatives to attend the DRB meeting. Attorney Grover said realistically they’d be back before the Planning Board sometime around May.
Attorney Grover explained the two requirements for landscaping. 1. Rows of cars head to head with a planting strip in between, trees in that planting strip as well. 2. One shade tree for every 3 parking spaces. If they account for all parking spaces, there would be over 100 trees. So he suggests interpreting it as one tree for every three visible parking spaces.
Steve Livermore went over the renderings. All buildings are roughly the same height; the 3-story building height is similar to what's on Mason St. Ken Petraglia, BETA group, said there is a cuing issue at the Flint St. lights, they've agreed to evaluate the signal and consider retiming. Into the site drive, there should be a left turn only lane, the consultant feels parking should be eliminated on that side on Flint St. Ken Petraglia said they met with the Fire Dept, and that they haven’t seen any change in plans. Amy Lash spoke with Erin Griffin who said the only changes they asked for were for additional hydrants.
Ken Petraglia suggested additional signals on Mason St. & Flint St., the consultant made a commitment to that. Tremont St., Mason St. and site drive have site distance problems. Ken said they’re recommending that this be signalized. Reasons for this: high accident rate location, poor site distance, the proponent prepared sketch to widen Tremont, but Ken doesn’t feel it addresses the situation. Nadine Hanscom asked the consultant why they are against a signal. Steve Livermore explained that they’re not really for or against a signal, it’s that they’re not sure how the City stands on this situation. They need more information from the City, also, how do the residents feel about this. Tim Ready asked whether the Police Dept. has weighed in on this
intersection, do they have an opinion? Do they have data on this intersection? Ken Petraglia said that he hasn’t consulted that department. Lynn Duncan suggested it’s the Planning Department’s responsibility to get the data from the Police Department, so they will get that information.
There was a suggestion to widen Tremont St., and Pam Lombardini suggested that if they were to widen Tremont St., it would cut into Mack Park, is that feasible? Ken Petraglia said that if you cut into the park, it would be about 5 ft. Christine Sullivan asked how many entrances are required for this project. Attorney Grover said there is not a particular amount required. Christine suggested that since Flint St. is old and narrow, and if the entrance off Mason St. is sufficient, maybe they don’t need the entrance off of Flint St at all. Lynn Duncan reminded the Board that for Osborne Hill, when the Planning Board and Consultant agreed on a light, they made it a condition and added ‘providing City Council approval’; they could potentially do that in this case.
John Moustakis suggested making Goodhue St. a two-way street like it used to be. That would alleviate a lot of traffic. He asked if it would be possible to get someone here at the next meeting to talk about this. Lynn Duncan will talk to Lt. Prezinsky. Walter Power reminded all that issues might take a while to work out. If Goodhue St. is made two-way, it may be an easier travel. He thinks we should also utilize the parking lot across the street (at the top of Flint), possibly expand the pocket with parking. Attorney Grover said they have designated 12 spaces in the lot to Flint St. residents. The Board and neighbors need to realize parking and traffic are an existing problem- and the project is not adding much to the problem. Ken agreed with Attorney Grover adding that
lights on Tremont and Mason Streets aren’t just for new problems, they’re also for existing problems. Jeff Maxtutis of EarthTech responded to Christine Sullivan’s inquiry about the traffic study during afterschool hours and explained that this project will generate less than 1 vehicle per minute in the morning peak hour; a little more than 1 vehicle per minute in the afternoon peak hour, and during the hours of 2-4 is about the same.
Meeting opened to the public
Councillor Paul Prevey (Ward 6) lives on Tremont St., and says there is little effort of cars to slow down when they approach Flint St. The cars parked on Flint St. act like a barrier. If there weren’t any cars parked on Flint St., it would be worse. He supports Goodhue St. becoming a two-way street. As far as traffic lights, the traffic impact and density make him somewhat leery of this solution. Attorney Grover said they will consider a left-turn only out of Flint St.
Sonia Hernandez (89 Flint St.) feels that removing parking on Flint St. will make cars go even faster down that street. She has parking on Mason St. and said it’s hard to cross with her two kids, parking across the street in the proposed new lot and crossing Flint St. will be difficult too. She said the neighborhood petitioned and got a one-way sign put up on Friday, and it worked pretty well, but it was taken down the following Monday.
Bill Penta (89 Flint St.) told Board members that neighbors stood guard because commuters were trying to rip down the one-way signs. He asked about construction trucks in that area, Attorney Grover said there would be a Construction Plan. Mr. Penta said if there were to be no parking on Flint St., it would be bad because they block traffic and slow it down. Attorney Grover said they have considered slanting the driveway so that people couldn’t turn into the driveway from the other way.
Martin Imm (174 Federal St.) worked on the NRCC masterplan and said it included long-term traffic recommendations including the extension of Commercial St.; extending Tremont onto Commercial. He suggested having Commercial St. coming across; they’d have to use some parking spaces to put Commercial St in. He feels that this is an opportunity to work with the traffic problem.
Dave Pelletier (12 Crombie St.) said to come out of this process without a solution to Flint St. would be to fail.
Darrow Lebovici (122 Federal St) asked about the report’s predicted additional trips an hour in peak and for an explanation. Jeff Maxtutis explained the numbers, 3-6% increase in the morning and afternoon, defining those making the left and right turns. Mr. Lebovici asked about the capture ratio-how many cars would raise the number of trips? He was asked how this project affects him and he stated he is concerned for the neighbors on those streets. Lynn Duncan reminded all that that’s why there is a peer reviewer to evaluate. Tim Ready asked Mr. Lebovici if he accepts the traffic study. Darrow Lebovici said he accepts it but doesn’t agree with it.
Bill Penta and Sonia Hernandez said they agree with making Flint St. a one way or left turn only. Jeff Maxtutis clarified that there would be a left-turn only lane into the project drive. He reiterated that the impact of the project on the roadway is the issue on the table.
Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning & Community Development reviewed some recommendations of the NRCC masterplan and how this project is meeting those. She said the Planning Board could not take action without a recommendation from the DRB. The Masterplan suggests a project to facilitate a gateway to downtown. For the North area, extend Mason St. to Commercial St; extend Commercial St to Flint St. Offer parking spaces; improving and maintaining views; enhance residential character; enhance the canal edge.
Gene Collins asked if these were recommendations, not requirements. Lynn Duncan confirmed that they are recommendations, and feels this plan meets many of them.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the public hearing to May 1st, seconded by Gene Collins and approved (8-0).
Gene Collins clarified that the Planning Board cannot change streets, like Goodhue St., but they can suggest it to the City Council.
A motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to extend the deadline for final Planning Board action to May 30th, seconded by Gene Collins and accepted (8-0).
Chuck Puleo suggested a site visit on April 19th at 9 a.m.
Old/New Business
· Chuck Puleo said the Beverly Cooperative Bank still hasn’t provided screening. Amy Lash has spoke with Tim Smith and is expecting to see a screening proposal soon.
· Chuck Puleo said the stop sign at Swampscott Rd & First St. is missing. Amy Lash will call the DPW.
· John Moustakis mentioned that he knows the Planning Board can’t change streets, but they can recommend their ideas to the City Council (members).
· In regards to the role of the DRB, Tim Ready feels that an overwhelming influence of the Planning Board does not overcome the DRB’s effort to objectively review the process and make a recommendation to the Planning Board. He thinks the Planning Board needs to be very cautious and careful to allow them to exercise their responsibilities in the best possible measure and then forward their recommendations to the Planning Board. Chuck Puleo said he went to two (2) meetings, along with Walter and they had a chance to speak. Although the DRB politely listened, they still did their deliberations. He feels the architects on the DRB are diligent
and professional. He said they don’t just review, they spend a lot of time reviewing details and used the Salem Evening News building project as an example. For that project, they’re working with a developer trying to work in the most economic way, while the DRB is trying to get a better product out of it, which is their job. Amy Lash said the Salem News Redevelopment is not coming back to the Planning Board. Christine Sullivan said a few members of the Planning Board had a wonderful meeting with the DRB where they talked about their roles. She feels sometimes the DRB doesn’t know where the Planning Board and SRA are coming from. Christine said they had a good conversation with the DRB and emphasized that the Planning Board has a willingness to look at different kinds of design and they, in working with the Planning Board, should exercise their judgment. Christine said when she was on the SRA, sometimes the DRB would make recommendations, the SRA
wouldn’t like them and they would send it back again. Christine believes in open communication. Tim Ready restated that he’s troubled and strongly believes the DRB should have the opportunity to exercise their best judgment and to do their best work and when they’ve completed it, forward it to the Planning Board. Christine agreed. Chuck feels the DRB clearly knows what their duty is. Christine said she’d like them to know to look at the entire structure, not just areas in question. Amy Lash said that for Salem Suede, the DRB will be doing a schematic level of review, and she will communicate the concerns she has head from some of the Planning Board members (though not all of them) to the DRB staff.
· Elections
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to elect Chuck Puleo as Chair; and Walter Power as Vice Chair, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
Walter Power suggested said the Planning Board needs stability and suggested a three-year term instead of a 1-year term.
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 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Stacey Dupuis, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| 
