 |
Minutes of Joint Public Hearing with the City Council and Planning Board
June 4, 2008
A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held Wednesday, June 4, 2008 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts on the proposed zoning amendment to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and associated Zoning Map by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include the St. Joseph’s Church parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street (Map 34, Lot 0307). Said property would be rezoned from Residential Multi-Family (R-3) to B-5 Central Development (B-5). Notice of this meeting was posted on the official bulletin board and advertised in the Salem news.
City Council Members present: |
Absent: |
President Mike Sosnowski, Ward 2 |
Joan B. Lovely, Councillor at Large |
Steven Pinto, Councillor at Large |
Joseph O’Keefe, Ward 7 |
Thomas Furey, Councillor at Large |
|
Arthur Sargent III, Councillor at Large |
|
Robert McCarthy, Ward 1 |
|
Jean Pelletier, Ward 3 |
|
Jerry Ryan, Ward 4 |
|
Matthew Veno, Ward 5 |
|
Paul Prevey, Ward 6 |
|
|
|
Planning Board Members present: |
Absent: |
Chuck Puleo, Chairman |
Gene Collins |
Pam Lombardini |
Nadine Hanscom |
John Moustakis |
|
Tim Ready |
|
Tim Kavanaugh |
|
Christine Sullivan |
|
|
|
City Council President Mike Sosnowski reviewed the petition and time requirement. He introduced Chuck Puleo who then introduced the Planning Board members. Councillor McCarthy said that a petition was received by the City Council and they had 14 days to refer it to the Planning Board to schedule tonight’s joint public hearing. After this Public hearing is closed, the Planning Board has 21 days to act on it and get back to the Councillors. It would be good if they could get their recommendation back to the Council by the 22nd so it can be included on the agenda for the meeting on the 24th. Councillor McCarthy said he brought forth the order for the zoning change for the St Josephs site. The request is to change to B5 zoning which will allow for mixed use. It’s the same developer as previous for this site, they’re committed to quality, affordable housing and they need this leeway to allow them to talk with retail developers. He feels it’s a natural fit for the area.
Councillor Sosnowski suggested a presentation from the developer. Joe Correnti (63 Federal St.) representing the property owner, said there is no development being proposed this evening. Prior development suggested was residential, but they would like mixed-use development on site. It’s an expensive property to develop, as a couple of buildings need to come down, some need to be revitalized. They need a financial partner for the first floor, as the City is not a potential partner. The zoning is R3, which didn’t matter when it was a church and school, but now it does matter. The parcel is not much like parcels in R3, it’s more like parcels in B5. It allows us to talk to partners who could be in B5 by right: retail, commercial could be on first floor. We don’t have
a partner signed up yet, once we do we would have to go through site plan review.
Councillor Sosnowski opened the Public Hearing.
Lucy Corchardo (58 Peabody Street) spoke in favor of the project saying that windows have been broken, there is squalor, lawn littered with trash, and it’s time for a change. We need to improve the area and need more eyes to look over the area.
Shirley Walker (Derby Lofts, Lafayette St.) was in favor, thinks it’s a great developer and would like to see affordable housing at that site.
Attorney John Carr (Salem) represents 43 clients who appealed the original ZBA Variance Decision, the Planning Board Decision & the ZBA 40B Comprehensive Permit approval. Clients are immediate abutters, 300 ft abutters, those in Lafayette Street area and include Hispanic, working class and immigrants. Zoning change is not recent. They were approved on first floor for residential, now they want retail, which he said is a high volume drug store with a drive thru, which would be in a congested neighborhood. Attorney Carr said they say it’s not spot zoning, but if you look at the neighborhood, you’ll see it’s predominantly residential. It was previously argued that downtown should be extended up Lafayette Street but his clients don’t want that. The intersection is very busy.
Attorney Carr said he realized abutters weren’t notified, but they don’t have to be by law, he found out only by chance. How is an immigrant who speaks Spanish supposed to understand this? He believes several members of the Council have already made up their minds. He said the developer has no serious negotiations with his clients, doesn’t feel they have to talk to us. He doesn’t think they should be rezoning in the middle of a lawsuit, feels it’s spot zoning. If it’s a great project, why does the mayor have to bend the lines?
Councillor Pelletier felt that Attorney Carr was saying that they (the Councillors) don’t know their jobs. How many clients do you have in the suits? You can’t tie conditions to the rezoning-and he urged them to think about that there is more than a single use not set in stone. He asked that Attorney Carr to please forward Council the names of his clients. Attorney Carr said it was already sent but he will resend again.
Linda Locke (1 Pickering St.) owns 46 Dow St, plus two more private properties that abut St. Josephs. Spends time in park with kids, not in favor of having the downtown zoning extended to this busy intersection. She feels people will hang around more in the park if they vote in favor of it, also, they don’t need another drug store. She can’t see how the developer can’t afford this. She mentioned that Rita Walsh of VHB has done neighborhood Preservation Study. She doesn’t understand how the developer can’t afford to build without a retail anchor. Chuck Puleo asked how the she and others felt about the density of the area, with current zoning they’d be allowed to build 33 units and she was comfortable with that, not with the potential if zoning is changed.
A motion was made to close the public hearing, all in favor, unanimous vote. Tom Furey cited the Salem News Building as an example of a renaissance and mentioned that this is an exciting opportunity for this neighborhood.
President Sosnowski asked the City Solicitor if they need to have a vote, but she hasn’t gotten an answer yet. Chuck Puleo reminded people that when this goes to the Planning Board, it will be a public meeting but not a public hearing, so once the public hearing is closed, that’s it. Councillor McCarthy made a motion to refer this to the Planning Board for their recommendation, all approved.
Councillor Pelletier said that 27% is commercial in Salem, and mentioned that we need business in Salem.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Veno to adjourn the meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Stacey Dupuis, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| |
