Salem Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
February 5, 2009
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 5, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan, Tim Ready, Dave Weiner. Absent: John Moustakis Also present were: Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the January 7th City Council/Planning Board joint hearing were reviewed.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to accept the minutes, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (8-0).
The minutes of the January 7th Planning Board special meeting were reviewed.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
The minutes of the January 15th regular meeting were reviewed. On page 4, Chuck Puleo questioned whether the sentence “the number of vehicles are all less than 10 vehicles per minute” makes sense. Danielle will check the recording for this to clarify who said, “will generate a small amount of trips”.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (8-0).
Public Hearing- Personal Wireless Service Facilities Special Permit- Omnipoint Communications, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of T-Mobile USA, Inc.) 181 North Street (Map 27, Lot 1200. Attorney Scott Lacy – The proposed project includes the installation of six (6) antennas on the roof of the existing condominium building and ancillary radio equipment cabinets located within a ground-level fenced leased area.
Attorney Scott Lacy, representing Omnipoint, explained that the site is a multi-story condo and the proposed facility would be located on the center of the pitched part of the roof. The proposal consists of 6 antennas that will not be visible as they will be within a proposed 12 ft tall faux chimney. There will be cabling along roof edge and ancillary equipment cabinets. There is an existing fence compound on the side of the building and they will add another fence compound with the same type of fence 8 ft high to conceal the new radio frequency equipment. There will be no HVAC for this equipment as it has its own internal fans. Cabling will run flat to roof and will be inside a cable tray that will be painted to match brick façade. Attorney Lacy said that the site is necessary because
T-Mobile has a gap in coverage and the new facility will cover some of those areas not currently covered.
Hearing Opened for Public Comment
Councillor Paul Prevey, Ward 6, Tremont St., asked if there are any health concerns since the facility is proposed on top of a residential building. He also wondered if there were any photo renderings and what kind of materials would be used. As far as health concerns, Attorney Lacy said that the FCC regulates all licensed carriers who have to comply with Federal standards, and these antennas and equipment have low power usages. There are a number of similar facilities on residences, churches and schools and they meet FCC standards. The material to be used is fiberglass. Attorney Lacy mentioned that if this isn’t acted on tonight, he could try to present some photos of similar sites. Chuck Puleo added that in Salem, they try to keep antenna/equipment/chimney in one location; Attorney Lacy said that as
long as they don’t cause interference with T-Mobile, there should be enough room to add additional antennas to this site in the future.
Regarding the views, Gene Collins feels that the neighbors can’t see the top of the building.
John McDonald, 61 Buffum St., spoke against the project. He can see the building from his house and doesn’t want to look at the proposed chimney, and he also doesn’t want to risk any health effects. He feels it would be a hindrance if he wants to sell his home. Chuck Puleo added that as far as health risks, they do meet FCC health requirements as Attorney Lacy explained earlier.
Karen Piotrowski, 181 North St, was originally against this and is now for it, has done a lot of research with the World Health Organization (WHO), Cancer Society, etc. and found that there have been many studies showing these facilities are safe.
Sharon Smidt, 181 North St., spoke against the petition. She quoted what Ms. Piotrowski had told her prior to the meeting: that she’d rather have the tower on their building emitting waves in another direction than having it constructed elsewhere and emitting waves toward their building, so Ms. Smidt felt that must mean there is something wrong with it. Ms. Smidt found that the American Cancer Society hasn’t determined the effects yet. She added that the roof has a lot of problems such as water leakage and other damage. She explained that the Condo Association voted against this the first time, but the second time it wasn’t discussed. She also spoke with real estate agents who said the condo values would go down if the facility were installed.
Max Freiert, 181 North St., is on the Pickering North Condo Association Board and he confirmed that a meeting was not held to conduct the final vote; instead, paper surveys were distributed to residents. According to Mr. Freiert, of the 25 units in the building, 78% of owners responded to the paper survey and the majority in favor, so the vote is valid. To address the issue of what the building will look like, Chuck Puleo suggested that Attorney Lacy come back with photos with views from Buffum St, Simon St., before and after pictures, and renderings of what neighbors will see. Chuck Puleo would like to see literature on health impacts as well. Danielle McKnight said she passed the plans and application to Janet Mancini of the Health Dept. The health concerns are up to the Board of Health to determine;
Ms. Mancini will review the proposal with her Board.
Councillor Jean Pelletier, Ward 3, asked about the company’s position on the health hazards. Attorney Lacy explained that the FCC determines the level of radio frequency emissions that will cause human harm and the company must comply with those standards. John McDonald added that because the building is high, there is a concern with things blowing off, for example they’ve had slate shingles blow off in the past, which is a risk to neighbors. Chuck Puleo added that they would need to get a permit from the building department and the building inspector would be involved to be sure construction was done to code.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the public hearing at the next meeting, seconded by Dave Weiner and approved (8-0).
Public Hearing – Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit & North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit-Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-679 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property) – Attorney Scott Grover
Attorney Scott Grover representing Riverview Place LLC addressed the issue of parking near the Flint St. entrance to the site. BETA suggested reconfiguring that area of parking because they are concerned that cars backing out would have obstructed views and would be dangerous to cars entering the site. He showed an alternative site plan, which has 32 spaces, as before, but with the spaces placed so as to allow cars to back out away from the entrance. However, Attorney Grover said Riverview Place prefers the original configuration of parking. Attorney Grover said the new parking alternative negatively infringes on some of the landscaped area that acts as a buffer between the parking lot and Flint Street. Chris Huntress explained with the new parking scheme more impervious area is created, landscape buffer is
lost and the arrangement is more awkward for cars to turn around. There are a total of 309 spaces on site - 260 spaces (2 spaces per unit), 12 for the Flint St. residents, and 37 spaces for commercial. Mr. Huntress said they are providing the maximum parking that might be required for the commercial and residential space, since they don’t know what’s going in for commercial use yet and want to be sure there is sufficient parking for any possible commercial use. Mr. Huntress also said this plan meets landscape requirements but would need to add trees to comply with zoning. Attorney Grover mentioned that if the Board likes this parking layout better, they can do it, but it’s not desirable.
The second issue discussed is the number of stories of the building. Steve Livermore submitted an opinion to the building department stating why he felt the plans complied with the maximum number of stories in the NRCC zoning (4 stories) and received feedback from Tom McGrath agreeing with his opinion. However, Mr. McGrath had stated that he would need to see final drawings showing grading in order to make a definitive determination.
Attorney Grover also said they met with the Design Review Board (DRB) the previous night so they made some revisions based on some of the DRB’s suggestions. Attorney Scott Grover felt it appeared from that meeting that the DRB is getting ready to make a recommendation to the Planning Board.
Bill Ross, NE Civil Engineering, presented his most recent peer review. He stated what his concerns were, including the lack of existing utilities showing and the industrial wastewater treatment facility on site. They need to get plans from SESD and will have to have a TV camera inspection to see where the connection is. Mr. Ross has questions as to where will poles be dug into city streets; there are no isolation valves shown for city water mains, they need to get that information. Mr. Ross said the largest issue is city drainage, particularly the drain that leaves Mason St. and heads through the project. A TV line and report must be done on this because they can see something going in but cannot find outlet into river. Mr. Ross said they want to see where the gas utilities are; the
drainage plan looks acceptable; for stormwater management/flooding, they need delineation maps and plans for bioretention. Mr. Ross said that before final approval, every sheet of the plans still would require some form of revision.
There was a brief discussion of dumpster locations. Mr. Ross noted there would be one outside dumpster and the rest of trash will be stored inside. Nadine Hanscom is concerned with gas lines being worked on, particularly considering this is an old site, and as work is going on, wants to be sure someone (from the City) is overseeing the work. Bill Ross said they are required to pull a street opening permit from the City. Chuck Puleo believes a job this size should have a Clerk of the Works.
Bill Ross would like more information on snow removal and how many parking spaces it will take up. He also questioned the impact of lighting on adjacent properties as well as whether the building with commercial space will require a loading area. Mr. Ross said there are also some minor landscaping questions remaining such as whether there will be irrigation lines. Attorney Grover expects to respond to the site engineering issues at the next Planning Board meeting, and BETA, the traffic peer reviewer, will be coming to that meeting as well to finish the discussion about traffic issues.
Christine Sullivan asked if BETA had looked into impacts from the court construction traffic signal changes. Danielle McKnight said they asked BETA about the signal changes and their impacts, and BETA doesn’t predict there would be a significant impact. Tim Ready encouraged the applicant to work with BETA to come to a consensus before coming to the next Planning Board meeting.
Chris Huntress went over the updated landscape plan. Revisions include: the removal of 4 spaces from the parking lot on the Flint St side; the widening of the planting buffer between the parking in front; 7 spaces removed from the site and put into the garage to increase the landscape buffer; in the back of the building, a single entrance to the garage allows planting area to soften the view from Flint St.; the strengthening of the pedestrian walkway by adding specialty pavers to define it; and a bumped curb line in the middle of the walkway to visually break up the length of street. It was noted that the walkway on the left side connects to state-owned parking lot.
Chris Huntress explained that there are two styles of lighting (shoebox and ornamental) and the fixtures come with a feature to shield the residential/abutters side. Mr. Huntress said there will be wall lighting to code. Once the project is complete, they can do photometric and field adjustments and add shields if necessary to adjust impacts to the surrounding neighborhood.
The Planning Board received a letter from Beth Rennard, City Solicitor, explaining that with regard to density bonuses, the Planning Board does not have any legal authority to vary, set aside or modify any decision of the BOA. There are exceptions - density bonuses for historic preservation and affordable housing - but neither of these applies to this case.
Hearing Opened for Public Comment
Martin Imm, 174 Federal St., feels the Board can, in fact, address the density issue through site plan review. He suggests the Board deny the petition because this proposal doesn’t fit the site. He also mentioned the connection of Commercial Street as in previous meetings. He asked how people would get from their cars to their apartments and Steve Livermore explained that there would be a connection from the garage into the building so they won’t have to go outside.
Meg Twohey, 122 Federal St., mentioned that regarding traffic on Flint St., residents feel traffic has changed immensely since the lights have changed. Nadine Hanscom suggested they bring these concerns to the next meeting when a discussion of traffic was planned. Meg Twohey attended the recent DRB meeting last night and said there was a suggestion to redesign the garage with an additional 50 spaces to add green spaces to the area by removing surface parking. There was also an idea for a green roof. Steve Livermore said they could look at the green roof idea, but the client is concerned with economics.
Christine Sullivan is concerned about requiring the commercial space on the site; she feels it doesn’t make sense in a residential area and adds unnecessarily to the size of the site. Nadine Hanscom said she’d had a similar concern and discussed it prior to the meeting with Danielle McKnight. Danielle McKnight clarified that commercial space was required in the NRCC zoning district and that waiving this requirement would require a use variance, which is not permitted in Salem. Attorney Scott Grover said they moved the commercial to the back so it’s not in the residential area.
Councillor Paul Prevey wanted to know, what the landscaped buffer between the project and abutters would look like. Chris Huntress said they have added evergreens, shade trees and ornamental trees and showed perspective drawings.
Councillor Jean Pelletier commended Bill Ross and his work.
Danielle McKnight mentioned that some board members would not be here at the next meeting and asked which members knew they would not be attending. It was confirmed that three members would be absent on February 19, so Attorney Grover indicated he would like to continue the public hearing to the March 5, 2009 meeting. Attorney Grover expects that they would have a DRB recommendation for the next meeting. Danielle McKnight confirmed that the next DRB hearing was scheduled for February 25, 2009.
There being no further comments, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the Public Hearing at the March 5th meeting, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0).
Old/New Business
- Elections - Pam Lombardini suggested holding elections when the full board is available at the first meeting in April.
- Danielle McKnight said the Planning Dept. received plans for a Chapter 91 marina at Hawthorne Cove. If anyone wants to see them, they can contact her.
- Chuck Puleo noticed the rows of parking at the project on Canal Street (Dollar Store). He thinks the project looks like its closer to Canal St. than it should be; a few others agreed and wondered who goes out and checks on projects once they are in construction. Danielle McKnight said if there’s no clerk of the works for a project, she would check. Other sites mentioned that needed inspection were the North Street garage (was it over 10,000 square feet?) and Beverly Cooperative Bank (was there HVAC screening?). Danielle McKnight said she would check into those.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Gene Collins and approved (8-0).
The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Stacey Dupuis, Clerk
Salem Planning Board
| 
