MINUTES OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 6/4/12
A special meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Monday, June 4, 2012 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, Tim Ready, Mark George, Tim Kavanagh, and Helen Sides. Also present: Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning and Community Development, Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner, and Beth Gerard, Planning Board Recording Clerk. Absent: George McCabe, Lewis Beilman, and Randy Clarke.
Chuck Puleo opened the meeting at 7:06 pm.
North River Canal Corridor Transportation Study – Public Meeting #3
Discussion of transportation issues within the North River Canal Corridor (NRCC) area. The City has engaged Fay, Spofford & Thorndike as consultants to examine the traffic impacts of the redevelopment of key sites and to recommend transportation improvements for the area. This third public meeting will include a discussion of draft recommendations.
Gary Hebert, Transportation Engineer, Fay Spofford and Thorndike, stated that he would explain the implementation part of the project and make recommendations. He said that the purpose of this evening’s discussion would be to provide an order of the magnitude of the costs and identify implementation priorities. He reviewed the project area and identified the key redevelopment parcels including Legacy Park, Flynntan, Gateway Center, North River and Riverview Place. He noted that the city is working on several projects in terms of repaving some of the streets. He pointed out that there are some traffic calming measures that have been proposed including the addition of traffic lights, widening of certain roads and adding turn lanes.
Mr. Hebert began explaining the priority levels in terms of years when they will occur and then reviewed the recommendation elements with the projected low and high costs associated with the recommended actions. He first noted the issues with the various locations listed as “first priority(1-3 years)” including Mason Street, the intersection of Mason and Tremont Streets, the intersection of Mason and Flint Streets, the intersection of Aborn and Boston Streets, and the Harmony Grove Road shoulder bike lanes. The costs associated for each of the project run between $235k and $330k. The second priority (3-5 years) locations include Grove Street between Mason and Goodhue Streets; the intersection of Bridge Street and Boston Street, the intersection of Flint Street and Mason Street; the Mason Street calming;
intersection of Goodhue and Beaver/ Bridge Streets, New Bridge Street and Goodhue Street with a multi-use path; and the intersection of Aborn and Boston Streets. The projected low and high costs for these projects are between $100k - $800k each project.
John Moustakis asked if there has been any consideration to make Goodhue Street a two-way street. Mr. Hebert stated that they gave this area a lot of consideration and they determined that this would create serious risks to pedestrians and would back up the traffic queues significantly. Mr. Moustakis responded that there are only two ways to get downtown from North Street, and he noted that North Salem needs another option for getting downtown. He feels that this needs to be considered further. Mr. Hebert stated that they are also considering a bypass street from Bridge St. to Goodhue St. to help mitigate this issue as well.
Mr. Hebert continued his presentation by presenting the third level priorities (more than 5 years) which included Boston Street crosswalk enhancements between Essex Street and the Peabody line; Bridge Street between Flint and Boston Streets; and the Boston Street corridor to the Peabody line.
Mr. Puleo asked about the widening of Bridge Street and the Bypass Road, asking if there is a city cost or if it is the responsibility of MassHighway. Mr. Hebert stated that this is not part of the city costs.
Mark George asked what is the best way to deal with Flint and Mason Streets, and if Mr. Hebert could start with a blank slate how would he do it. Mr. Hebert stated that he would widen towards the park, improving site lines. Mr. George stated that it is not going to get better, it will get worse with the added traffic to which Mr. Hebert agreed. Mr. Hebert stated that he would start with an all-way stop sign. Mr. George asked if he knew what that would do to traffic. Mr. Hebert stated that he doesn’t think it will help traffic but it will make the intersection safer; and if the traffic can be diverted to a proper location, it can be better, but there are painful tradeoffs for that too. Ms. Duncan asked Mr. George to clarify if he is referring to the whole street or just the intersection. She
reminded Mr. Hebert and the Board of the first meeting where Mr. Hebert stated that his first recommendation included removing parking from Flint Street and his second recommendation was to make Flint Street one way, and another recommendation included a traffic signal. Mr. Hebert clarified his comment by stating that something still has to be done about the intersection itself and he also noted that Mason Street and Tremont have similar volumes. But he cautioned that before he recommended a traffic signal, he would like the all-way stop at Mason and Flint to be tried first, as the conditions for an all-way stop are perfect for that location. In an ideal world they could move parking to an acceptable location.
Mr. George stated that when he looks at that immediate locus there are two roadways and he knows that the neighborhood does not want more traffic and he agrees with that. He notes that they have a bad situation that is about to get worse with the advent of the upcoming projects in the area and he feels that the situation is untenable now. Helen Sides stated that there a great deal of traffic now and until there is so much traffic that no one wants to drive anymore, there is going to continue to be a traffic issue; and all they can do is adjust people’s behavior. She noted there are many places in the city where people drive so fast because people are trying to get ahead of everybody. She thinks that the recommended measures will back things up but it will slow things down. Mr. Hebert stated that changing the
parking situation could be one of the measures that help the most as he found that it was due to the parking locations around the intersection that slow people down. Ms. Sides commented that ironically it is the parked car on Flint St. that slows people down.
Mr. Moustakis stated that North Street needs another way to get to downtown. He stated that he lives up there and the traffic is horrendous. Mr. Hebert agreed and stated that one of the things that will help significantly is getting the sidewalks added as well as making bike environments more user friendly. Ms. Sides interjected stating that they are not going to add more real estate for roads as she noted that the more cars that get added, the more traffic issues there are. Tim Ready added that there is no magic wand in this board’s hands and it’s a matter of dealing with the situation at hand. Mr. Moustakis stated that this needs to be looked at further and brought up the issue of making Goodhue Street two-way.
Ms. Duncan stated that this is not the first time that they have asked a traffic engineer look at Goodhue Street. The reasons that she recalls in the past were related to a sight line issue, to which Mr. Hebert described the issue further. He then described the challenges of the area and discussed new intersection possibilities including a new bike path, and traffic calming efforts. This would contribute to the safety of the area and there are a lot things that can be done in that area which would make a huge difference to the traffic. Bridge Street can look and work a lot better than it does right now but Goodhue Street is a different issue due to the five-way intersection at Boston Street.
Mr. Ready reminded the Board and the audience that we are listening to an engineer who is listening to all of the suggestions and concerns.
Issue opened to the public for comment
John Reardon, 35 Chestnut Street, who is also the President of Board of the Harmony Grove Cemetery, stated that they have a whole lot of problems on Grove Street and Harmony Grove Road which includes replacing fencing. He concluded his comments by saying that it’s a traffic nightmare and it’s a weird intersection. Mr. Hebert recommended that he look at the schematic that they created which is available on the city website and included geometric modifications.
Nelson Dionne, 12 Summer Street, stated that 20 years ago there was a proposal to extend Tremont Street to Bridge Street and asked if this was included in the study. Mr. Hebert stated that they only looked at it in terms of the Commercial Street connector as it created a difficult intersection at Mason Street. He further stated that the huge down slope contributed to the difficulty in that area, thus they came to the conclusion that it could not work.
Lisa Joubert, 70 School Street, stated that she lives in North Salem and she keeps hearing the words “traffic capacity” which concern her. She doesn’t want to see the traffic capacity increase and she wants the traffic to come to a grinding halt to make it safer. She wants bottlenecks to not open the traffic more. Mr. Hebert asked what she thought of the 3-way stop. She stated that what happens currently during rush hour is already a three-way stop, so she doesn’t think it helps during rush hour. She noted this used to be a quiet neighborhood and now it’s a zoo. She feels that they need to find ways to slow the traffic down and these recommendations are not her first choice. Ms. Duncan asked what she would like to see. Ms. Joubert stated that she doesn’t
care which direction it goes, but Flint St. should be one way. She also recommended allowing parking in areas that will slow people down. Ms. Sides stated that it’s a long term teaching opportunity if people learn that there is a three-way stop there and she noted that it’s not new people getting lost driving through there, it’s the regular drivers who are zooming down the streets. Ms. Joubert stated that she loves the idea of a traffic light at Mason and Tremont. Mr. Hebert stated that they are looking at the city taking actions to calm traffic at these areas.
Ms. Duncan asked for clarification on the Mason Street calming. Mr. Hebert responded that originally the idea was to take the opportunity to do the calming measures at the same time that the street was being repaved. They also thought that they would try out alternate side parking but those relocations require time and city action. Ms. Duncan and Mr. Hebert noted that traffic changes go through the city council. Ms. Duncan asked if the repaving is not getting done until drainage issues are dealt with, to which Mr. Hebert yes, on the part of Mason between Tremont and Buffum. He noted that the goal is to get the traffic calming measures in place at the same time as the repaving.
Mr. Moustakis noted that the people who are cutting through are not Salem people and they don’t care.
Peter Eschauzier, 15 ½ River Street, stated that he lived in Marblehead about 40 years ago and used to cut through Salem and it was common knowledge that regardless of which cut through route you choose, cars get to the same point in the same time. He stated that he observed that the only change is that there are more cars. He recommended that if the streets were marked better it would help significantly. He also feels that signals could be improved to prevent gridlock. He asked if there has ever been a study done to look at the percentage of cars on the main streets to see where they are going to which Mr. Hebert responded that he didn’t think so, but his question would be, what would one do with that. Mr. Eschauzier asked what are the plans for Bridge Street between Flint Street to North Street.
Mr. Hebert responded that the plans were to mirror what had been previously done and create a four lane intersection, like it is further up Bridge Street. Though currently part of it is used for spillover parking from the Commuter Rail station, and while the garage is being built they will need as much extra parking as possible. He noted that once that is done, the plan is to make that a four lane road, to which Ms. Duncan said that it’s the missing piece. Ms. Duncan stated that this is the state’s plan and the project will move more quickly once the garage is built. Mr. Eschauzier stated that what is happening today is something that one has to live with and noted that he attended a neighborhood meeting concerned about speeding. He felt that this will always be a problem unless cars are forbidden from coming into Salem.
Amber Woolfenden, 85 Flint Street, stated that she is saddened to hear that there does not seem to be a solution. She recommends moving parking to Mack Park. Mr. George stated that things are going to get pushed and people are going to be looking for shortcuts; it’s not just Mason Street and Flint Street, it’s North Salem as well. Mr. George also stated that he wants the audience to know that they are concerned about those impacts. Ms. Woolfenden asked if Oak Street has been considered for a full one way. Mr. Hebert stated that Oak Street is not a safe alternative, as it is steep and winding.
Ms. Duncan provided an update on the work being done in the Planning Department related to this project. She stated that Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner, is working on contacting the owners of the Public Storage site and has been having conversations with others to find advantages for these owners to benefit from these projects which could include an easement on the other side of the property in order to build the proposed connector road.
Ms. Duncan asked Mr. Hebert about his recommendations for Flint Street. Mr. Hebert responded that if he had his druthers, his recommendation would be to find a safe way for people to have access to their vehicles on Flint Street, but still control it at the end of Mason Street. He would like to change the traffic to something more pedestrian friendly and in a perfect world he would push something out to get more space for sidewalks and sight lines. Mr. Puleo asked how people are allowed to park on park land. Ms. Duncan stated that people are allowed to park on designated park land. Mr. Puleo clarified that there is no way for the city to widen it to use it, to which Ms. Duncan said she did not think so, but she could check on it.
Ms. Joubert asked how these concerns impact the remainder of North Salem and she suggested that the traffic study site be enlarged. She asked what is the process to raise concerns to the next level. Ms. Duncan stated that there is no way to expand a study without it impacting another area. She further explained that they don’t want to study an area and not be able to do anything about it. They are talking to the Public Storage people and the 28 Goodhue Street owners to try to pursue building the connector road to improve conditions in this area. Ms. Joubert then asked about what can be done about the Main Street area, which she noted will be losing a lane and have a major trickle-down effect. Ms. Duncan stated that Boston Street is a priority for reconstruction, and pointed out that the
Bridge Street Neck is almost done and Canal Street, with it’s drainage issues, is on the list for fiscal year 2014, Boston Street is the next major priority area. Ms. Joubert asked about the process for making an area a priority and Ms. Duncan stated that she believes the process is to go through the mayor’s office, but this study was in response to comments from the public, form the Planning Board and the city councilors. Ms. Sides commented that the Planning Board was thrilled that these intersections were being looked at together. Mr. George stated that this is the kind of process that helps it all along. Ms. Duncan stated that they never intended the scope to go all the way down Mason Street to Aborn Street and asked Ms. Joubert the scope of the area that she is suggesting for study. Ms. Joubert responded that someone needs to look at Tremont Street from the Peabody line all the way to Mason Street and the connecting streets all
the way over to Tremont; she added School Street, Symonds Street, and Dunlap Street. Mr. Ready commented that what she is describing is the ripple effect.
Mr. Hebert then presented two graphics showing his idea on how to deal with Mason Street. Ms. Duncan stated that this would be very helpful to share with the City. Mr. Puleo asked for clarification on what would need to happen to make this happen. Ms. Duncan reviewed the legislative process to look at this.
Mr. Reardon stated that the lousy pavement on Chestnut Street is the best deterrent for speeds. He noted that during the 1960s there was a proposal to run Route 128 running through the middle of Salem.
Ward 6 Councilor Paul Prevey, 26 Tremont Street, thanked Mr. Hebert for his work on this project. He thinks that one thing the city should look at are the more immediate low-hanging fruit such as signage and striping that could add a significant traffic calming measure. He feels that this is something that would go a long way. He added to not only put the striping down, it’s important to also maintain it. Councillor Prevey concluded stated that this is something needed sooner rather than later.
Peter Nugent, 12 River Street, asked what the purpose of the study is. Mr. Hebert stated that the purpose was to look at the cumulative traffic in the area due to development and to encourage better walking and more safety in the area. He noted that he wants to make sure that this area is more pedestrian- and bike- friendly; the study is really focused on multi-modal traffic. Mr. Nugent asked if these recommendations came out of this study to which Mr. Hebert said yes.
Mr. Puleo asked about street lighting, commenting that it’s really poor in some of the study areas. He recommended that the street lighting should be included in some of these areas. Mr. Hebert stated that the lighting can be changed to look attractive and there are ADA requirements that have to be met if the lights are added to the sidewalks, to which Mr. Puleo asked how these work. Ms. Duncan stated that the City has to look into this further in terms of right-of-way. Mr. Hebert stated that the street lighting is included in the Boston Street costs, as well as the Phase II costs associated with Mason Street, however there wasn’t a detailed lighting plan done as part of this study. Ms. Duncan stated that they need to talk to the City Electrician further about this and while it is not part of Mr.
Hebert’s scope, it is something that the City needs to consider.
Mr. George thanked Mr. Hebert for his work and noted that it gave the Board a broader understanding of the issues.
Ms. Duncan stated that this will be posted on the city’s website and they will post the full report online when it’s available. She also noted that this is the third and final meeting on this issue.
Adjournment
John Moustakis made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Helen Sides. All approved 6-0. Chuck Puleo adjourned the meeting at 8:30 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Gerard, Recording Clerk
Approved by the Planning Board 7/5/12
| 
