City of Salem Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
Thursday, November 20, 2014
A regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 313, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts.
Chairman Puleo opened the meeting at 7:08 pm. ~
Roll Call
Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Chair, Ben Anderson, Vice Chair, Helen Sides, Randy Clarke, Kirt Rieder, Dale Yale, and Matthew Veno. Absent: Noah Koretz and Bill Griset.
Also present: Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner, and Pamela Broderick, Planning Board Recording Clerk. ~
Approval of Minutes
November 6, 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes
Minor corrections were made by the Planning Board members. ~
Motion and Vote:~Helen Sides made a motion to approve the revised November 6, 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes, seconded by Kirt Rieder. ~The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor and none (0) opposed.
Regular Agenda
Location: 148 Marlborough Road
Applicant: Anthony M. Jermyn and Richard R. Jermyn
Description: A public hearing requesting a waiver of frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law and a request for approval of an Approval Not Required plan.
Documents and Exhibitions:
None
Attorney Joseph C. Correnti, of Serafini, Darling & Correnti, LLP, 63 Federal Street; presented on behalf
of the applicant and requested to continue to December 4, 2014 to provide time to respond to feedback from the City.
Chair Puleo read into the record correspondence received to document the request to continue.
Motion and Vote:~~Matt Veno made a motion to continue the public hearing to December 4, 2014, seconded by Dale Yale. ~The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Yale and Mr. Veno) and none (0) opposed.
Location: 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219 & 231-251 Washington Street
(Map 34, Lots 0403, 0405 & 0406)
Applicant: Dodge Area, LLC
Description: A public hearing of the application for Site Plan Review, a Planned Unit Development Special Permit, a Flood Hazard Overlay District Special Permit and a Stormwater Management Permit for the construction of an approximately 190,000 square foot mixed-use development with residential units, commercial space including a potential hotel, a parking structure, associated landscaping, and pedestrian and transportation improvements.
Documents and Exhibitions:
None
Chair Puleo advised the applicant has requested to continue to the December 4, 2014 meeting.
Motion and Vote:~~Ben Anderson made a motion to continue the public hearing to December 4, 2014, seconded by Helen Sides. ~The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Yale and Mr. Veno) and none (0) opposed.
Chairman Puleo disclosed that his firm has hired Griffin Engineering for a small project in Beverly. The
state ethics commission recommended his firm file an Appearance of Conflict of Interest (Form 23B3)
with the Mayor’s office, which has been done. Mr. Puleo is getting no special pricing for the services of Griffin Engineering, and Mr. Puleo is still able to vote on this petition without a conflict of interest.
Location: 60 & 64 Grove Street and 1, 3 and 5 Harmony Grove Road
(Map 16, Lots 237, 236, 377, 239 and 378)
Applicant: Grove Street Apartments (f/k/a Legacy Park at Harmony Grove Apartments)
Description: A public hearing for an application to allow an amendment to the previously approved Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Flood Hazard District Special Permit. The proposed amendment includes changes to: site-related vehicle and pedestrian access (including elimination of Harmony Grove vehicle access), parking lot layout, landscaping, environmental remediation, and stormwater management. Eleven (11) parking spaces at 60 Grove Street, the commercial building, have been eliminated; the number of residential units is reduced from 141 to 129 units and one (1) additional residential parking space is provided. No changes are proposed to the total square footage or footprints of the buildings.
Documents and Exhibitions:
Grove Street Apartments—Revised Site Plan dated October 16, 2014
Vanasse & Associates, Inc., Correspondence Regarding Single Entrance, dated August 7, 2014
Grove Street Submittal Letter from Griffin Engineering, dated October 16, 2014
Grove Street Figure 1 Planning Board Approved Layout, dated October 2012
Grove Street Figure 2 Proposed Layout, dated October 2012
Letter Report No. 4—Grove Street Apartments Peer Review dated Nov 17, 2014 from Woodard & Curran
Slide Presentation titled “Former Salem Oil & Grease Brownfields Site Redevelopment”
FST Harmony Grove Peer Review Traffic Memorandum Dated November 19, 2014
Attorney Joseph C. Correnti, of Serafini, Darling & Correnti, LLP, 63 Federal Street; presented on behalf
of the applicant (a project from MRM Development). Additional speakers included:
- Robert H. Griffin, P.E., principal, Griffin Engineering Group LLC, 495 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA—proponent’s engineering consultant
- David A. White Jr., P.E., Senior Vice President, Woodward & Curran, 95 Cedar St, Ste 100, Providence RI—engineering peer reviewer
- Giles Ham, P.E., Managing Principal; Vanasse & Associates, 10 New England Business Center Drive, Andover, MA—proponent’s traffic consultant
- Alan Cloutier, P.E., PTOE, Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, LLC (FST), 5 Burlington Woods, Burlington MA—traffic peer reviewer
Atty Correnti reminded the Board this is the former Salem Oil & Grease site. Permitting began 2 ½ years ago; a decision was granted in 2012. Conditions issued by the Conservation Commission were appealed by the state Department of Environmental Protection and are presently under appeal. State permits are needed; MEPA certificate and Chapter 91 license. The project has encountered delays and challenges due to the appeal. The issues surrounding the appeal have caused the applicant to seek approval for an amended plan. The single biggest change to the plan is the elimination of the vehicular access at Harmony Grove Road.
Mr. Griffin continued with the slide presentation.
Site Characteristics
The site is about 8.3 acres of land made up of five different parcels. Zoning is BPD and R2; a portion of the Harmony Grove parcel is zoned BPD- Industrial. No work is proposed on the 5 Harmony Grove parcel
which extends to the Peabody line or the 1 Harmony Grove parcel. Site is favorably located for residential development, being equi-distance to Peabody Center and the Salem train station (approximately .9 miles); and 2.0 miles from Route 128. A portion of the site is in the entrance corridor overlay district.
Mr. Griffin reviewed the industrial history dating back to the early 1700s. Uses included tanneries and Salem Oil and Grease from 1912 until 2002 when the site was abandoned. 60 Grove Street (1912 office building) to be renovated and used in proposed project. There are a number of buildings standing on the property, dating from different periods, pictures were provided. Canal walls were installed approximately the same time the railroad tracks were laid, around the 1880’s.
Redevelopment of this site is complex due to the constraints imposed by past industrial uses. Industrial purposes were first considered but ultimately no firm interest was expressed. Existing railroad tracks and the canal add to development constraints. Tidal river with associated wetlands, flood zones add another layer of complexity to redevelopment as well as the 200-foot riverfront zone. No change in the flood zone based on new maps issued this year. Between 2006-2009 considerable effort was spent in hazardous clean-up on the site under the supervision of a Licensed Site Professional (LSP). Several Activity and Use Limitation (AULs) have been placed on the site by LSPs.
Review 2012 Approved Project
3 residential buildings of 4 stories and basement parking
47 units per building for total of 141 units
1 and 2 bedroom units
237 parking spaces (1.5 per unit)
17000 square feet in commercial building re-use (60 Grove Street)
3 driveway entrances (2 on Grove Street and 1 on Harmony Grove Road)
Property main entrance off Harmony Grove Road using deeded access railroad crossing over the North River Canal.
Pedestrian Bridge proposed, providing access from commercial parking by 60 Grove Street to shared green path along the canal. The pathway is intended to be paved for shared bike/pedestrian use with extensive landscaping from Grove Street to Harmony Grove Road.
Extensive landscape plan included embankments and screening for Beaver Street side of the site.
Next Steps
Salem Historical Commission authorized building demolition (December 2012)
Salem Conservation Commission provided order of conditions (July 2013)
MEPFA Environmental Notification Form (ENF) filed (April 2013)
MEPA review process requested a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
MCP—LSP filed Phase II and Phase III to define additional clean-up, and filed UAL modification
MBTA determined railroad crossing design, license issued
DEP filed an appeal to Order of Conditions from Salem Conservation Commission. Require additional information from the proponent regarding: flood storage, stormwater management and issues related to the new bridge across the North River Canal. The proponent proposed to replace the existing bridge with a structure significantly wider, and raise it as high as possible.
Applicant filed Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) filed March 2014.
DEP expressed concern about flooding; required hydraulic analyses done on both flooding and floodway. Proponent was required to demonstrate the removal of the existing bridge and replacement with new bridge will not have a significant on flood waters in the City of Peabody. DEP still has concerns about the bridge and is now requiring the proponent demonstrate the bridge is water-dependent; ie there is no feasible access to the site except to use the bridge. Final EIR must also address final improvements to Grove Street and additional details about stormwater management.
As Peabody has not finalized their flood management plan, it is clear DEP will not approve anything to be built that might impede any future mitigation for Peabody flooding.
2014 Development Plan Modifications
- Eliminate new proposed bridge across North River Canal, to and from Harmony Grove Road; Main entrance to the site via Grove Street
- Change name of the project to “Grove Street Apartments”
- Reduce number of units (1 unit per floor less) from 141 to 129 to reduce traffic generated by the site.
- Increase the width of the pedestrian path to 14-feet and install bollards to accommodate emergency vehicles (Knox lock box access)
- Repair existing bridge for shared-use pathway.
- Eliminate parking spaces in rear of commercial building as this is prohibited on filled land, per DEP.
- Remove new proposed pedestrian bridge to commercial building.
- Environmental remediation of the sludge bed located at 3 Harmony Grove Road and construction of capped disposal cell on site.
- Minor driveway, landscape, parking lot and stormwater changes.
Atty Correnti advised the mayor’s office and other stakeholders have made attempts to resolve this matter and preserve the vehicular bridge. Ultimately these efforts have been exhausted. To move forward with the project the proponent is now asking to remove both the new pedestrian bridge and the replacement vehicular bridge to eliminate any possible objections from DEP. A bollard will be installed to prohibit vehicular traffic on the existing bridge.
Board Discussion:
Board asked what protections the neighbors have with regard to the disposal cell. Mr. Griffin advised the size of the sludge bed is known; the cell will be constructed above the water table and immediately capped. The Board also asked if removing the material is feasible. Mr. Griffin advised yes, likely and will be considered.
In response to a Board member inquiry, Mr. Griffin advised the driveway plan was coordinated with City’s Grove Street Reconstruction Plan.
Atty Correnti advised the detailed overview was provided to put the 2014 modifications in context.
The Board asked for a resubmitted landscape plan, referenced in the presentation. Details probed by the Board included:
- Is there a handrail/guardrail along the canal? Mr. Griffin advised the approved plan did not include treatment for the area to the south of the parking lot, where the disposal cell is planned. On the top of the cap they are planning grass, the top of the cap includes 2.5 feet including a foot of sand. Shrubs may be possible but nothing larger on the cap. The cell cannot extend under the parking lot due to the nature of the sludge. The approved canal-side treatment is a wall, with landscaping in front of it to keep pedestrians away from the canal.
The Board asked if the reduction of parking spaces affects the commercial space. Mr. Griffin advised it may impact usage of the building.
Peer Review Traffic
Alan Cloutier of FST, traffic peer reviewer, continued the presentation and advised the elimination of the Harmony Grove entrance impacts two intersections to a slight degree—Grove Street/Harmony Grove Road and Grove Street/Mason Street.
- Driveway intersection with Grove Street will operate at good levels of service with minimal delays.
- People coming out of Building 1 will have a hard time seeing incoming traffic; recommend the proposed curve be modified with a smaller radius to allow for improvement of the angel at the intersection of the access drive and the garage.
- Bollards are now discouraged on bike paths unless there is an existing problem with vehicular traffic on bike paths. They are needed to block the old bridge to Peabody but not needed on the new shared green path.
Board Discussion:
- The Board suggested a change of materials at the apron might be an alternative to bollards along at the Grove Street entrance to the shared green path.
- The Board asked if 28 Goodhue Street and PAGS projects are included in the traffic analysis; Mr. Cloutier confirmed.
- The Board asked if reducing site access from 3 to 2 entrances will impact traffic on Beaver Street. Mr. Cloutier advised it will not have a discernable impact.
Peer Review Engineering
David White of Woodward & Curran engineering continued the presentation. He advised the firm looked at changes in the stormwater management plan, and advised there are three notable changes:
- Type of stormwater treatment device has been changed; the proposed hydro separator filtering unit will meet the needs and capacity.
- Stormwater infiltration field opposite Building 2; DEP perceives the site as a potential polluter due to trip increases. Size has been increased which is a good solution.
- Catch basin in commercial lot will be connected to City drains. City needs to understand condition of existing drains and capacity. Recommend as condition of approval this be addressed. It will be important to confirm the existing pipe in the street can handle the flow.
Mr. White advised there were ten (10) conditions on the original approval, recommend they remain as proposed with exceptions;
- D&E were with regards to the vehicular bridge, these no longer apply, but final engineering plans should be submitted for the record.
Mr. White emphasized the timing of the project is sensitive; any improvements in the public right of way must be coordinated with the moratorium on street excavation during Grove Street Improvement work.
Chair Puleo asked about flooding issues on Harmony Grove Road. Mr. Griffin advised they no longer plan to make any improvements to Harmony Grove Road, asking this condition be removed.
Chair Puleo opened the meeting for public comment:
- Barbara Lewis, 81 Tremont Street; asked why the landscaping has been simplified?
- Mr. Griffin advised the strip of landscaping along Harmony Grove Road where the main entrance was proposed is no longer necessary as there will no longer be an access roadway here. A strip of grass with maple trees along the bike path is now proposed.
- Ms. Lewis also expressed concern regarding usage options for the commercial building with very little parking available.
- Mr. Griffin advised there are 11 parking spaces remaining for this building; possible commercial uses might include storage. The developer is confident a tenant can be found.
- Mark Addison 2 Beaver Street; reducing to one entrance will impact the neighborhood; traffic coming from Peabody or points south will cut through the neighborhood using Watson Street off Boston Street. These are very narrow streets. The elimination of the entrance on Harmony Grove Road will have a negative impact.
- Michael Ross 20 Beaver Street; concerned that periodic flooding on Harmony Grove Road will increase traffic on Boston and Beaver Streets.
- Joan Sweeney, 22 Silver Street; stated she was involved in planning of sludge removal pit from Silver Street. DEP advised for this project the sludge had to be removed. She spoke in favor of removing the sludge on the Grove Street Apartments site rather than capping it. Harmony Grove Road continues to be closed several times a year due to flooding. The proposed capped cell is not an adequate solution to the sludge, concerned about odor especially during flood times.
- Mr. Griffin advised the relocation of the sludge is expected to take less than two weeks and the cap will include a geo-membrane and three feet of soil so there will be no odors coming from the capped cell. The flood zone does not come into the disposal cell area; in fact the current location of the sludge is in the flood zone, and so moving and storing it represents an improvement.
- Michael Hubbard of MRM Project Management, 3 Broadway, Beverly (developer) advised 500-700 yards is the estimated size of the sludge.
- Planning Board member Randy Clarke reminded the Board and audience that during 2012 the Board spent quite a bit of time discussing how to alleviate the flooding on Harmony Grove Road. Would cleaning up the catch basin at the existing pedestrian bridge/pike path help?
- Mr. Griffin advised it might and they would be willing to keep the condition on the plan.
- Chair Puleo recalled the agreement was to install a double catch basin if the engineers determined this was needed.
- Meg Twohey, 122 Federal Street; spoke to support concerns over increases in traffic in the Beaver Street neighborhood. She also expressed concern about the height of the buildings in relation to adjacent backyards in this historic neighborhood. Suggested they reduce the number of floors on at least one building as an alternative to increasing the size of the units.
- Mr. Griffin advised they are all less than the 50-foot limitation per zoning in the district.
Chair Puleo reminded the audience the focus of the Board now is to consider the proposed changes to the approved plan rather than to revisit aspects of the project which have been previously approved.
- Brian Sweeny, Beverly; grew up in the neighborhood and is concerned about preserving screening for the abutters. He cited the development of the Stop & Shop site was not a good precedent. Screening was effectively removed when trees were cut down and replaced with low plantings that were not maintained.
- Chair Puleo reminded the Board and audience that abutters received mitigation in the form of fencing as that was what was requested at the time. There are no changes to the landscaping plan as it abuts Beaver Street.
- Mr. Griffin advised the screening between their site and Beaver Street was specifically addressed. They have identified large trees on the embankment to be preserved and developed a plan to enhance and fill in with additional planting. The plan is to retain as much of the existing natural buffer as possible.
- Mr. Sweeny further asked about alternatives to leaving the sludge pit onsite under a cap.
- Mr. Griffin explained it is part of the LSP plan to treat the waste at present. Handling of this material is highly regulated. However it is possible the LSP may determine removal is feasible and reasonably priced.
- In response to a follow-up question from Mr. Sweeny asking if a traffic analysis was done, Mr. Ham advised access change will generate some traffic to Beaver Street, which is off set by the overall reduction in traffic due to fewer units in the project.
- The Board explained the role of Mr. Ham of Vanasse & Associates is traffic consultant for the proponent; the City peer reviewers of Fay, Spofford & Thorndike reviewed the work of Vanasse & Associates as advocates for the City’s best interests, not the developer’s interests.
Atty Correnti summarized by thanking the City peer reviewers to attend on short notice, and thanks to the Board for their consideration.
Motion and Vote:~~Randy Clarke made a motion to continue the public hearing to December 4, 2014, seconded by Dale Yale. ~The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, Ms. Yale and Mr. Veno) and none (0) opposed.
Old/New Business
- 107 Highland Avenue update from the site visit.
Documents:
Deer Hill Architects, LLC A4 & A5 site elevations, stamped November 20, 2014 received by Planning Department
Developer Robert Willwerth presented a site elevation plan detailing all treatments agreed during the Planning Board visit to the site. Board clarified the siding will be “Pacific blue” siding with white trim plus accent color.
- Discussion of memo regarding Bridge Street Neck zoning.
Board members collectively observed the reason the Bridge Street Neck Neighborhood Master Plan/Revitalization Study did not move forward was in part due to a concern that creating first floor commercial/upper residential would create too much low income dense housing. The report needs leadership to implement other recommendations of merit. Planning Board members found many of the recommendations desirable and in the best interests of the neighborhood.
Chair Puleo reported he briefly discussed the matter with the City Planner who pointed out the Planning Board could influence the development of the corner lot on Bridge Street/Planters Street when the developer asks for a waiver on the basis of frontage.
After discussing at length ways to bring attention to the needs of this key entrance corridor and neighborhood, the Planning Board concluded the proper channel to resurrect the project is to request the City Planner to bring the matter before City Council. Progress will depend on the active support of the Ward 2 Councillor to work with residents to gain support and direction. Perhaps an overlay district rather than specific zoning is the best tool. The Planning Board believes this matter is very important as Bridge Street Neck is an entrance corridor and creative solutions are needed to encourage improvements and redevelopment in this neighborhood.
- MassDevelopment letter of preliminary approval to issue a revenue bond on behalf of North Shore Community Development Coalition, Inc., for a project proposed on Harbor and Lafayette Streets in Salem. The proposed project does not conflict with any local or regional comprehensive plan.
Chair Puleo read the correspondence into the record and advised the Board 15 Harbor Street and 104-106 Lafayette Streets are the affected buildings; planned upgrades for homeless housing. CDC owns these buildings. No action required of the Planning Board. Mr. Veno suggested a copy of this correspondence be forwarded to the Salem Redevelopment Authority.
- Department of Environmental Protection Notice of License Application for Algonquin Gas Transmission. A copy of the notification is available to the Planning Board.
Chair Puleo clarified this is the gas pipe from Beverly Harbor to Collins Cove power station and a point of information to the Board.
- Nomination Form from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to nominate that a portion of the Point Neighborhood be designated as a Point Neighborhood Historic District. The location of the proposed Point Neighborhood Historic District is roughly bounded by Peabody Street, Congress Street, Chase Street and Lafayette Street. A copy of the nomination packet is available for circulation to the Planning Board.
Ms. Schaeffer noted this is a point of information to the Board.
Adjournment
Motion and Vote:~ Randy Clarke made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Helen Sides. The vote was unanimous with seven (7) in favor (Mr. Puleo, Mr. Anderson, Ms. Sides, Ms. Yale, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Rieder, and Mr. Veno) and none (0) opposed.
Chairman Puleo adjourned the meeting at 9:50pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Broderick, Recording Clerk
Approved by the Planning Board on 12/04/2014
Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A § 18-25 and City Ordinance § 2-2028 through § 2-2033.
| 
