 |
SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES 12/1/11
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, December 1, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, John Moustakis, Vice Chair, Mark George, Lewis Beilman, Nadine Hanscom, Helen Sides, and Tim Ready. Also present:: Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner, and Beth Gerard, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Absent: Randy Clarke and Tim Kavanaugh.
Chuck Puleo opened the meeting at 7:20 pm.
Approval of Minutes
November 17, 2011 draft minutes
Postponed until the next meeting.
Old/New Business
The Planning Board presented a gift to Christine Sullivan for her years of service on the Planning Board. Ms. Sullivan thanked the board for their hard work in improving the city.
Public hearing: Petition of G.B. NEW ENGLAND 2, LLC, for the property located at 72 LORING AVE; 292, 296 & 300 CANAL ST; and 399 ½ & 401 JEFFERSON AVE (Map 32, Lots 27, 29, 30 & 31, and Map 23, Lots 170 & 191), Salem MA, for Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development, and Drive-Through Facilities. The proposed PUD project includes the buildings currently housing the existing Eastern Bank, Tedeschi Food Shop, Autozone and Atlantic Ambulance service, and the construction of a new CVS pharmacy with a drive-through, including associated parking and landscaping.
Attachments & Exhibitions:
- Applications for Planned Unit Development Special Permit, Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Special Permit, all date-stamped 11/10/11, and accompanying materials
- Site Plan for CVS/Pharmacy #7109, Jefferson Avenue & Canal Street, Salem, MA 01970, prepared by RJ O’Connell & Associates, Inc., dated 11/10/11
- Exterior Elevation drawings prepared by BKA Architects, Inc., dated 11/8/11
- Stormwater Management Study, CVS/Parmacy #7109, Loring Plaza, Canal Street and Jefferson Ave., Salem, Massachusetts, prepared by R.J. O’Connell & Associates
- Traffic Impact and Access Study, Propsed CVS/Pharmacy, Salem, Massachusetts, prepared by GPI (Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.)
- PowerPoint presentation titled “CVS/pharmacy, Loring Plaza,” presented at meeting
Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal Street, Salem, represents the applicant. The proposal is a CVS pharmacy with a drive thru on lower Canal Street. Mr. Correnti stated that prior to this meeting they met with the South Salem Neighborhood Association and CVS responded to comments made by the neighborhood association. He introduced Jason Plourde, the traffic consultant; Paul Beck from Gershman Brown; Phil Henry, the site engineer; and Bryce Hillman, the site architect; and noted that the site owners, Esther Realty, are represented at the meeting as well. They will present how the project fits as a planned unit development, and how it makes sense with the shared access and parking in Loring Plaza.
Phil Henry, project manager from RG O’Connell, 80 Montvale St, Stoneham, MA, began the PowerPoint presentation by describing the location, site, planned unit development line and drainage of the project. The significance of the PUD line is that it borders on the residential area, but he noted that it is not in the residential area. He cited several features of the building layout, and pointed out that the Eastern Bank drive-thru is in the opposite corner from the proposed CVS drive-thru, to make sure that there is no confusion between the two drive-thrus. They also implemented a cross-access for vehicles so they do not have to leave the site, and showed a slide with examples of potential passenger vehicle routes which allow for the site to be accessed through various paths. He also showed the Board the
delivery truck route as well as the sidewalks for pedestrian access. He noted that the enhanced sidewalks, will discourage people from walking through the parking lot, and they also added a bike rack for cyclists. Mr. Henry then described the proposed stormwater runoff plan. He stated that they decreased the peak rate of runoff in all of the areas of the plan and increased the water quality. His final slide showed the landscaping plan, which included 40 new trees, and over 350 new low-lying shrubs.
Paul Beck, Gershman Brown, Lincoln RI, stated that CVS determined that there is a need for this store and it is a significant investment by CVS. He noted that while it’s close to the university, it will also benefit the rest of the neighborhood, and the normal hours of operation will be from 8am to 10 pm.
Bryce Hillman, BKA Architects, 142 Crescent Street, Brockton, MA stated that they created a colonial style building, with brick, shingles, etc, which fits with the architectural styles of the neighborhood. He described the outer views of the building, including proposed curb cuts and signage.
Mr. Correnti noted that this is different from the store that was permitted on Highland Avenue, which was a traditional CVS store; and based on the feedback they received from the neighborhood they felt this was the more appropriate design for the store.
Helen Sides asked if the scale was accurate, to which Mr. Hillman said yes.
Mark George asked where the cars will exit from the drive-thru. Mr. Henry demonstrated on the slides where the cars would exit, with one option exiting onto Canal Street, or a car can go around and exit onto Jefferson Avenue. He also noted that they are discharged at the rear of the building. Mr. George asked if is a one-way drive-thru, to which Mr. Henry stated that it is and further explained the traffic flow. Mr. George noted that there is a “choke point” that already exists on Canal Street, which he felt would be made worse if that served as the main entry and exit.
Jason Plourde, Greenman-Pedersen (GPI), Central Street, Stoneham, MA, explained how they developed the traffic study by walking the area, looking at the traffic flow, including the MBTA routes. The scope of the traffic study was developed with the South Salem Neighborhood Association, MEPA (Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office), MassDOT and the City of Salem. He stated that they have not submitted anything to the state yet as they want to get all local permits approved first. He explained details of the traffic study including the days and times that the traffic counts were done, including looking at accident data as well as signaled intersections. They noted that there are accidents that do occur in this area, however based upon the volume of traffic, the rates of accidents are below state-wide and
district-wide averages. They also looked at the MBTA buses and how passengers might use the businesses, and noted that their traffic counts don’t take any credit for bus service being available. He showed the access points currently on Jefferson Avenue and explained how each served Tedeschi and Eastern Bank. He explained the residential driveway would be modified to become the main site driveway. He said they also looked at the connection between Kimball Rd. and Canal St., and explained how Auto Zone and the ambulance station can be accessed from Kimball Rd. and said there is little control over vehicles entering that way. He showed the existing Canal St. driveway and its proximity to the intersection. He spoke of the Canal Street Improvement Project, which is being done by AECOM, who will also be acting as the City’s peer reviewers for traffic, and who are present here tonight. He explains the boundaries of the improvement
project and says it includes Kimball Rd., and travels north up to Mill St. He says it’s not pedestrian friendly today, which the City is trying to address. He says this project will not impact the City’s improvement project. He presented a slide on potential future conditions, and explained how this was calculated according to trip generation data. He stated that based on these calculations, this project would add 86 additional vehicle trips during weekday evening peak hours to the site. 44 would be entering and 42 would be exiting. During Saturday midday, there would be a total of 73 vehicle trips, 37 entering, 36 exiting. This doesn’t take into account any trip reduction associated with pedestrian or bus access. They assume all trips to the store will be associated with vehicles, so that they can assume a worst-case scenario for traffic.
Mr. Puleo asked if these calculations are based just on the CVS or the other stores, to which Mr. Plourde stated that these calculations are based on the CVS only. Mr. Puleo then asked why the site traffic wasn’t calculated earlier than 11 am. Mr. Plourde stated that the majority of the traffic at CVS is after 11 am.
Mr. Plourde continued his presentation. He explained how certain types of vehicle trips, including pass-by trips and diverted link trips were calculated, noting that MassDOT guidelines limit to 25% the number of these trips they can take credit for with regard to traffic reduction, while the Institute of Traffic Engineers allows them to take credit for 49% of these trips. If they use the MassDOT strict guidelines, they will show that there will be more new cars to the area, because they can’t take credit for cars already there, and those are the conservative standards used in their study. He noted that this isn’t the typical drive-thru, like McDonalds, it’s more of a drop-off/ pick-up window, as it will solely be used just for prescriptions. He noted that the proposed internal connections will
help get cars off of the road as they can access other businesses on the site rather than getting on the road to go to the business next door. Mr. Plourde then showed the pedestrian access points via walking, bicycling, or MBTA. He explained how the signage is confusing and often does not match pavement markings, causing driver confusion, which he feels explains much of the accident data for this intersection. He explains that another problem is the fact that cars park – legally – in the shoulder of the west side of Loring Ave. in front of the Enterprise Center, and as cars stop to turn left into the Enterprise Center, cars cannot pass those vehicles turning left because of the street parking. This causes backups to Jefferson Ave, preventing left turns onto Jefferson. He says they would like to work with the city to determine what solutions to these problems might be feasible, particularly given that these roadways are under state
jurisdiction.
In concluding his presentation, Mr. Plourde stated that the traffic impacts are based on conservative data, and volume increases would be 1 additional car every 2 ½ to 12 minutes, which he says is not noticeable. He says based on their data, the impacts from the project will not change the overall level of service at the traffic signals due to the project.
Mr. Puleo asks how having better access to the site from the new driveway would affect traffic to the other business on the site. Mr. Plourde said that retail to retail trips allow a 20% credit for traffic reduction. The evaluated the traffic on the site this way, accounting for some cars going to more than one business, as the ITE guidelines allow.
Mr. George asked how far back the current access driveway is being moved, to which Mr. Plourde stated that it is approximately 30-50 feet. Mr. George asked why Kimball Road would not be the main access point to ease up the traffic in the existing choke point on Canal St.. He says cars turning into the site at this point block other cars from passing. Mr. Plourde explained that they have examined alternatives, but that someone who enters the site from Kimball Road is coming up a hill. Mr. George said his recollection is Kimball Rd. is street grade until you get to the rear. Mr. Plourde says there is a slight incline coming in; he didn’t think if customers had to enter this way and see the ambulance service, they would think they had gone the wrong way. He also felt that people would also
use the existing Kimball Rd. for egress sometimes, if they were nearest to that part of the site and the other driveways were crowded – he said this kind of situation is self-regulating.
Mr. George then asked how wide the access road from Jefferson Ave. would be, and whether it would be two lanes or one, and Mr. Plourde stated that it would be modified to be one lane in, one lane out.
John Moustakis asked why they need three curb cuts from Jefferson Ave., and noted they are very close together. Mr. Plourde said the driveway closest to the signal primarily serves the bank, while the next one primarily serves Tedeschi. He says combining those two driveways might make it more difficult to turn left out of there, since there would be more volume coming from the one combined driveway. Mr. Moustakis stated that it is still causing traffic on Jefferson Avenue.
Ms. Sides stated that the entrance by Tedeschi’s is a problem now – it’s dangerous coming around Jefferson, and perhaps you could put people further down Jefferson and combined those two driveways, and change the parking area, making a clearer way to come around the edge and through the drive-thru. She says the lot is difficult also due to the grading. This whole area and the way the parking is set up should be reconfigured.
Mr. Plourde stated that their initial thought was to not disturb too much of what is currently there. He says he is very familiar with the area, and that the data did not show a significant number of crashes, surprisingly. He says their real concern was focused on the signal, and what could they do to improve things without blowing up the whole intersection, trying to come up with a scheme that would satisfy everyone within the right-of-way constraints. Ms. Sides stated that she hoped the whole site would be taken into account, including all the businesses there.
Mr. George stated that he didn’t understand how people were going to get out across Canal Street from that site driveway – most of the time it’s blocked. Mr. Plourde says the driveway is existing, and has traffic that enters and exists. Their proposal will increase traffic there, and at the Kimball Rd. and Jefferson Ave. driveways. They aren’t proposing any traffic movements that aren’t allowed today.
Mr. Puleo noted that left turns out of the CVS on Highland Avenue were restricted for certain peak hours because Marlborough Rd. backed up so much during those times, and this restriction works well. He says having Kimball Rd. as the site driveway wouldn’t cause as much of a problem since the traffic typically does not back up that far, and that should be looked at. Mr. Plourde says they will look at it.
Mr. Correnti stated that they have concluded their presentation.
Issue opened to the public for comment
Councilor Jean Pelletier, 7 Lawrence Avenue, noted that there are current problems in the area with the O’Keefe Center which impacts the drainage pipes. He asked that the Board to require the applicant to hire Woodward & Curran to comment on what is going on with the water problems in the area. He stated that the Jefferson Avenue entrance is on residential property, and he asked if there is a request for a zoning change. Mr. Correnti stated that the councilor is correct that part of it is in R-2, though they don’t need the zone change because they are invoking the 30 feet zoning allowance and the house is partially in the B-2 zone. He also stated that the area above the PUD line is all zoned residential. Councilor Pelletier is against the Jefferson Street entrance.
Councilor Joseph O’Keefe, 28 Surrey Road, stated that the intersection of Jefferson Avenue, Canal Street and Loring Avenue is the worst intersection in eastern Massachusetts. He said he is not opposed to the project, but he is opposed to the three access points on Jefferson Avenue. He feels that there should be just one on Jefferson. He also noted that he has been trying to get the Enterprise Center to not allow left turns out onto Loring Avenue, and street parking should not be eliminated. He feels that they should hire Fay, Spofford & Thorndike to be the traffic consultant on this project because of their work with the university. He asks Danielle McKnight to ensure they are hired for this review.
Ms. McKnight explained that the City Engineer requested AECOM for both the traffic and civil engineering consultants because of the work they are doing already on the Canal Street improvements. She notes they are here tonight and indicates Dennis Flynn and Paul Carter sitting in the audience.
James Rose, 25 Linden Street, is of the opinion that left hand turns should not be allowed out of CVS onto Canal Street and or into CVS from Canal St.
Ben Anderson, 10 Adams Street, stated that he is concerned about the light fixtures and light spilling into the neighborhood. Mr. Puleo asked how far up Adams Street he is to which Mr. Anderson answered that he is over 30 feet above the street. He stated that he is also concerned about Kimball Road being used as a cut through to Jefferson Ave. He thinks the building design is great, but he would like to see dormers. He is also concerned about noise levels - in particular from the compactor. He noted that drive-thrus tend to be noisy, and asked if it can be pulled closer to Canal Street. He said that he is not against the development. In terms of landscaping, he would like to see something in writing stating that the trees would be maintained. He stated that he would like a better-looking
visual barrier other than the current chain-link fence. He asked that there be something written in the decision that this location would not operate 24 hours per day. He asked how often the retension basins would get filled up.
Polly Wilbert, 7 Ceder Street, stated that her initial reaction is that more brick should be used in the façade of the building as it will unify the look of the buildings. She expressed that she is concerned that the traffic counts were taken during a huge recession. She also expressed concerns that as the driveway is closer to the Auto Zone building, that the people who are in AutoZone are going to have a difficult time getting out of the parking lot and backing into traffic. She noted that the location is at a blind corner. She also pointed out that in front of the Auto Zone, there is a fair amount of activity by people fixing their cars. She pointed out that this will have a significant increase in pedestrian flow, particularly from Salem State, and she is concerned about safety. She asked
if this could increase risks to the wetlands with the additional drainage. She thinks the city’s Canal St. improvement project should go all the way to the intersection, and she feels it’s short-sighted not to include that in the project plan. She stated that there are real traffic problems that have to be addressed. She said that she is concerned that the snow storage on Kimball Road will be insufficient, and she thinks that it will become a cut-through.
Councilor-Elect, Josh Turiel, 238 Lafayette Street, stated that his concerns are related to the traffic. He said he is concerned about people backing out of AutoZone into the traffic. His other real concern is having three curb cuts on Jefferson Avenue, and he doesn’t know how that is going to function.
Paul Lemer, 1000 Loring Avenue, said that his concern is at that entryway onto Canal Street. He recommends moving it further up and eliminating a few parking spots. He is also concerned about the student traffic coinciding with heavy car traffic. He asked what the peak hours of flow for a typical CVS are and how that impacts the traffic. He is also concerned about snow, though he is looking forward to CVS coming to this location.
Bill Barrows, 406 Jefferson Avenue, states that he lives in one of the houses across the street from the project and he currently has to look across five different areas to back out of his driveway. He said that with the new proposed curb cuts he will have to look across 6 different directions. He is concerned about accidents.
John Barrows, 406 Jefferson Avenue, echoed the previous stated sentiments stating that he is also concerned about traffic.
Matt Veno, 20 Forest Avenue, stated that the architectural design is great. He said that his major concern, though, is the egress onto Jefferson Avenue. He is concerned about the folks that live around the site and asked if there are additional buffers that can be added. He recommended preserving as much of the vegetated area as possible. He also recommended giving added capacity for a right turn lane in this area towards Jefferson. He is also concerned about ease of access onto the site and wonders if the double drive-thru is necessary.
Frank Gellano, 22 Weaherly Drive, said that he agreed with previous sentiments regarding Kimball Road and too many driveways. He states that the CVS truck runs over the sidewalk at Highland Avenue and he is concerned about that happening here. He noted that it takes five light cycles to get from Leggs Hill Road to the intersection in question.
Polly Wilbert asked whether the 1.1 acres beyond the PUD line will remain undeveloped in perpetuity. Mr. Correnti stated that area is zoned residential and is not part of the project. She asked how that will impact the project’s drainage if it’s built on. Mr. Correnti stated that the 1.1 acres that isn’t part of the PUD has no relationship to the drainage system. He stated that in every aspect, drainage will be improved on the site. The water will be contained, cleaner water going through the new stormwater receptors. All the drainage will be reviewed by the City Engineer and the city’s peer reviewer. The remaining acreage isn’t part of this – it’s residentially zoned land with no proposals for it. If the owners ever want to do something with
that land, they would have to go through the process.
John Moustakis made a motion to continue the public hearing until December 15th, seconded by Nadine Hanscom. All approved 8-0.
Adjournment
Nadine Hanscom made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chuck Puleo. All approved 8-0. Chuck Puleo adjourned the meeting at 9:37pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Gerard, Recording Clerk
Approved by the Planning Board 1/5/12
| |
