City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes of Meeting- Wednesday, October 17, 2007
A meeting of the Salem Zoning Board of Appeals (“Salem ZBA”) was held on Wednesday, October 17, 2007 in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts at 6:30 p.m.
Those present were: Robin Stein (chairperson), Rebecca Curran, Beth Debski, Richard Dionne, Steve Pinto (alternate), and Bonnie Belair (alternate). Also present were Building Commissioner Thomas St. Pierre and Amy Lash of the Planning Department.
Members absent: Annie Harris
Business Items
Petition of Sean Pray and Richard Smith requesting to modify a previous special permit decision to allow an exterior sign to remain for the property located at 3 HAWTHORNE BLVD [R-2]. --- Requested continuance until December meeting.
Robin Stein read a letter from Sean Pray requesting continuance for his petition for 3 Hawthorn Blvd. A motion was made by Bonnie Belair to continue the petition to December 19, 2007, seconded by Steve Pinto, and approved 5-0 (Beth Debski abstained).
A motion was made by Steve Pinto to approve the September 19, 2007 Meeting Minutes, seconded by Bonnie Belair, and approved 5-0 (Beth Debski abstained).
Joanne Fitzgerald Mcrea gave a brief presentation about the Community Preservation Act (CPA). She said it was on the ballot for November and if passed it would cost an average home assessed at $500,000 an extra $32 per year. She said that the funds would go towards historic preservation, open space, and recreation. She said it would be a way to strike the state budget and there would be a 100% match from the State. 127 communities have taken advantage of it so far. After it was voted in a CPA committee would be formed.
Public Hearing
Petition of Edward A. Potvin requesting a Variance from the number of stories allowed (2 1/2) to allow a third floor roof deck and a Special Permit to modify an existing non-conforming building for the property located at 12 Hanson Street [R-2].
Attorney Patrick Burke presented the petition of the Bass River Inc. He explained that Bass River runs programs to provide work and educational experience to mentally retarded adults. There are 65 adults, ages 22-65, participating in the programs at the 12 Hanson Street facility. The facility operates Monday-Friday, typically 9:00 am -3:00 pm and all the activities are staff supervised. They would like to provide program participants with an outdoor gardening experience, which is why they would like to build a roof deck.
Rebecca Curran asked if this would be a container garden. Yes, it would be a container garden Atty. Patrick Burke replied.
Richard Dionne said he didn’t have any problems with the proposed deck and is in support of it.
Tom St. Pierre said he has been to the property on numerous occasions to do inspections and the facility is very well run.
Bonnie Belair said she is concerned with safety and asked if the deck would be locked off. Attorney Burke said yes, they would take those precautions and that all activities are staff supervised.
Robin Stein asked if limits to keep the use of the deck to agricultural purposes should be incorporated. Beth Debski said she thought access to the deck to just be outside should be fine too.
There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Bonnie Belair to approve the request for a Variance from the number of stories, and a Special Permit to modify an existing non-conforming structure to allow for the roof deck subject to seven (7) standard conditions and one (1) special condition that supervised use be required. The motion was seconded by Richard Dionne and approved 5-0 (Steve Pinto abstained).
Petition of Helen Sides requesting a Variance from rear yard setback and a Special Permit to modify an existing non-conforming structure, to allow for a second story balcony for the property located at 1A DANIELS STREET COURT [R-2].
Architect, Helen Sides, presented the petition for the property owned by Hans Weedon. She said that they were at the Board only for the balcony. The balcony is off a planned second story addition. The zoning allows for the second story addition. She said she believed the existing setback is 16 ft, the new setback with the 3 ft balcony would be 13 ft.
Bonnie Belair asked if there would be stairs coming down from the balcony. Helen said no there would not.
Katie Bickford (5 Daniels St Ct) asked why nobody was notified about the second story addition. Robin Stein explained that a second story is allowed by right. Robin said that what’s being considered is a 3 ft impact into an existing no conforming setback and she did not think this would take away from the intent of the zoning ordinance. She asked if anybody wanted to entertain a motion.
Beth Debski made a motion to grant the Variance from rear yard setback, and a Special Permit to modify an existing non-conforming structure to allow for a second story balcony subject to seven (7) standard conditions and one (1) special condition that there be no stairs leading down from the balcony. The motion was seconded by Richard Dionne and approved 5-0 (Steve Pinto abstained).
Ward 3 Councilor Jean Pelletier asked that a better explanation about the height be given to the residents who came concerned with the second story. Tom St. Pierre showed the residents a copy of the plans and explained to them that the zoning ordinance allows for (2 1/2) stories.
Continued Petition of Riverview Place LLC requesting Variances from lot area per dwelling unit 7-21 (k), Variance from off street parking requirements 7-21 (m)(1), Variance from number of exterior entrances for dwelling units 7-21 (e)(2)(a), Variances of buffer area 7-21 (m)(1)(c) at 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street [NRCC].
Attorney Scott Grover presented the petition for Riverview Place LLC. Atty. Grover reintroduced the principals David Zion, Mike O’Brien, and David Walsh. He explained they have a purchase and sale agreement for the Salem Suede and Bonfanti sites. He introduced Stephen Livermore the project Architect, and Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey, as well as the traffic engineer Jeff Maxtutis of EarthTech.
Atty. Grover explained that the proposed project would redevelop the Salem Suede and Bonfanti leather factories for apartments. He wanted to focus on the changes that had been made to the plan since they had last been at the Board of Appeals. He feels the comments and concerns that they heard last time were in two areas: 1) the size and impact of the project on the neighbors and 2) the traffic problems already in existence.
Atty. Grover explained that they had first submitted an application in June with 160 units. After having a neighborhood meeting they decided to reduce the number of units to 148, the number they had come to the Board of Appeals with. The proposal has now been reduce by 18 units, bringing the total to 130 units. 13 units (or 10%) will be affordable, 117 units will be market rate. Atty. Grover said the density per acre is 28 units/acre of market rate units, and about 32 units/acre including the affordable units.
Atty. Grover said that the inclusion of the Bonfanti site is beneficial for marketability and quality of the project. He said the difference between this whole site compared to others in the area is the significant cost to clean up and demolish the buildings. He said for these reasons it is a unique site that must be looked on its own.
Last time they were seeking variances from parking, which they no longer need with 309 spaces proposed. He said they had met the requirements of 2 spaces per unit (260 spaces), 37 spaces are for the commercial space and 12 are earmarked for residents of Flint Street.
Atty. Grover said that the variances they were seeking were for the density and the conditions of the 50 ft. buffer and the use of separate exterior entrances. He presented Jeff Maxtutis of EarthTech to present an overview of the Traffic Impact Assessment.
Jeff explained that he started by looking at the existing conditions as a baseline, then looking at the impact of the project, then looking at mitigation efforts to improve both the existing and projected conditions.
Jeff explained that counts were done in September at commuter peak hours, which are from 7:00-9:00 am and 4:00-6:00 pm. He said the highest volumes of traffic were between the hours of 7:30-8:30 am, and 4:30-5:30 pm. Accident data was also collected from MassHighway. The projections looked five years ahead, and projections were influenced by the traffic generation data available for the type of use. Apartments are expected to generate less traffic than homes owned and occupied by families. He said when the counts were than compared to the as of right use of an office development, and they came out significantly lower. Jeff said that suggested improvements include an easement which would allow the extension of Commercial Street, a flashing
beacon at Flint and Mason, and a left turn lane on Tremont (which would require the street to be widened slightly on the park side).
Atty. Scott Grover said that the traffic impact assessment would be peer reviewed at the Planning Board stage.
Architect Stephen Livermore presented a visual which showed both the existing footprint and the proposed. The proposed footprint would be smaller, and the building would be further from the river. He said that 62% would be two bedrooms. He showed street view perspectives of the proposed and existing structure. He said the massing at the edge of the sight would be greatly reduced.
Bonnie Belair asked how 130 additional cars would not add to the poor traffic conditions. Jeff said it would not be 130 cars leaving at once and that the estimates assume that some residents would take transit.
Bonnie said she was concerned about safety. If there is already a higher crash rate, how would we deal with this?
Jeff said that by removing parking on Flint Street the site lines would be improved. Scott Grover mentioned that off street parking will be offered on the site.
Steve Pinto asked how a traffic signal would be approved. Councilor Prevey said he believed there would be a process with the Police Department and Engineering Department.
Robin Stein asked Atty. Scott Grover if his clients were willing to pay for the traffic light. Scott said yes they were.
Beth Debski said that the Zoning Board was a step in a series of steps that the development would have to go through. She said the Planning Board would look at traffic in more detail.
Bonnie Belair asked if there was a lender in place. Atty. Scott Grover said that MassDevelopment would be providing loan for acquisition and clean up. David Zion said that they have willing partners that will provide funding after the site is clean.
Scott read a petition in support of the project, which was signed by forty-seven (47) neighborhood residents. He submitted the petition into the record.
Robin Stein summarized a letter in support of the development which was submitted by John Hoskins of 22 Larchmont Rd and passed it around for the Board to see.
Robin then read a memo from Lynn Duncan about the process that the project would go through following the Board of Appeals. The memo explained that there is still independent review required by three boards, the Planning Board, Design Review Board, and Conservation Commission.
Robin opened the public portion of the hearing and invited members of the public to speak starting in the front right corner of the room and working around.
Ward 6 Councilor Paul Prevey said he met with Mr. Grover yesterday and is encouraged that the project has been scaled back and that less relief is being requested. He urged the Board to think about density. He is concerned with the failing safety grade with regards to the traffic. He said that a project of this size and scope could be detrimental to the traffic problem. He said he’s listened to the concerns and has taken them seriously. He wants to see the project go forward and feels that staying with the building that is currently there is unacceptable to everybody in the room.
At Large Councilor Thomas Furey said that both his parents worked in the leather industry and lived on Mason Street. Right now the area is blighted and he feels the proposed development would improve the City at large. He feels that major compromises have been made and that it is a win-win situation for the City.
Elizabeth Bradt (20 Commercial Street) is concerned about the current state of the property. She said she had learned that her daughter and her friends has walked around on the property and found syringes. She is in support of getting rid of the blight and existing problems.
Ward 7 Councilor Joseph O’Keefe sees pluses in the Riverview Place project. He is a fire protection engineer and feels that the current building is a fire trap.
Raymond Harvey (84 Flint Street) has lived on Flint Street for 35 years. He said that he will be glad to see the existing buildings go. He said that he and his wife made a deal with one another that they would move away if there was a fire at Salem Suede, which damaged their property.
At Large Councilor Joan Lovely said that the developers have brought down the density, and added adequate parking so she hopes the Board acts favorably.
Martin Imm (174 Federal Street) worked on the Master Plan. He feels that the question for the ZBA is the hardship question. He said everybody wants the existing building comes down and that is clear. He said the developer’s approach has been, “What can I afford to pay for the land?” He said that’s the wrong question to ask and that they should start be determining what the land is worth. Why should the current owner receive more than what is appropriate? He wants to challenge the developer and ask, “What can you really pay for that?” He said more focus is need on hardship.
Jim Treadwell (resident of Ward 6) is concerned that the intent of the Zoning Ordinance shouldn’t be deviated from. He said that on August 6th the Fire Department inspected Salem Suede and that things were in place in case of a fire. He questioned the numbers used by Mr. Maxtutis. He said the Master Plan recommended other traffic modifications and that the extension of Commercial Street could be accommodated on site. He said that 28 Goodhue only has 22 units/acre as opposed to 30, and that the Jefferson is also 22
units/acre. He said the Jefferson blends into the neighborhood with the townhouses on the edge. He said he strongly objects to the request to waive the buffer requirement. He said he was disappointed that there was no chance to meet with the developer following the August meeting. He said that the Bonfanti site is assessed at $640,000.
Lorene Scanlon (75 and 77 Mason Street) said she was representing the Mack Park condominium development. She said she and the other condo owners feel that the development is too large for the neighborhood and she is concerned about the noise of 130 units. She feels traffic is a huge problem and mentioned there had been an accident very recently. She said she has been concerned about the redevelopment of the site since moving to Mason St. She thinks people are only signing the petition to get rid of the buildings.
Pat Donahue (12 Dearborn Lane) does not feel that the development integrates with the neighborhood. He said the density is too much for 1 & 2 family residences and that such a development belongs on Highland Ave or near a highway. He said the design looks like a new addition to Salem Hospital. He said that the variances will set a precedent for projects to come.
Stephen Harris (148 North Street) feels that the parking issue has been addressed. He agrees with Ms. Belair that the biggest problem is people parking on the corner. He said the area could turn into a mega office complex which would mean that traffic doubles.
John Carr said he is a lifelong resident who worked on the NRCC zoning and that he served on the Historic Commission. He says it’s difficult for Board members to absorb all of the information at the meeting. He said that even with the density bonus from the affordable housing, there are still two times as many units as what is allowed. He said safety issues are separate from matters before the Board. He is not concerned with the first floor entrances, but he’s concerned about the number of units. He said there isn’t a market for office space.
David Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) feels that the next step after the demolition of the building would be to build a parallel Flint Street for northbound traffic. He said the project design should have more creative solutions and that the cart is being put before the horse. He feels the Jefferson is an embarrassment and that he doesn’t want a repeat of that.
Betsy Burns (22 Beckford Street) said “Does zoning mean anything in this City?” She feels that the density is still more than 2x what is allowed and wants to know how this can be dismissed. She wonders about hardship and wants to know why when the principal is also an owner there can be hardship.
Erin Lenz said that she is looking forward to this. She feels that there is an opportunity that shouldn’t be turned away. She says she is for the project and wants to remind everyone that Salem is a city, and this is the scale of a project that belongs in a city.
Jim Scanlon (Ward 6) says that he is a lifelong residents and he has always felt that the site was an eyesore. He thinks the opportunity to move forward should be seized.
Bob Manuppelli (Barr Street) says the developers have given and given. He is upset by the people from other wards commenting on this project. He said that the traffic would be cut in half with traffic coming and going through different entrances.
Mary (last name unknown, a resident of Essex St) feels that Salem is very lucky to have a Master Plan and zoning to back it up. She said that some communities are not in this situation. She said the project is too dense and it doesn’t fit in. In her opinion the developer hasn’t proven hardship.
The development team was given the opportunity to respond to public comments. David Zion talked about clean up costs. He said that the Bonfanti site would cost $750,000 to purchase, and $250,000 for clean up and demolition. The total cost would be one (1) million. If the site was only going to hold 20 units, after adding in permitting costs, the cost per unit would be in excess of $50,000. David Zion feels that the Bonfanti site hurts the project financially, but he feels it is key to the redevelopment of the area, he wants to leave a legacy. David said that in 1980 his father purchased the property for 1.1 million. He said his father was not the polluter and that he was actually the one who put in the water treatment facility. David said that with the
inclusion of the Bonfanti site, the costs would be up to $35,000 per unit. David said that his father did have 10-15 inquiries of people interested in buying the site for residential development.
Robin Stein brought it back to the Board for comments.
Richard Dionne said that he applauds the developers for their efforts. He personally likes the design of the project. He feels 130 units is a lot, though something needs to be done. He said given the site and the support from the direct abutters he said he feels this is an excellent project he can go on with it.
Steve Pinto said he felt as though something had to be done. He feels the hardship is legitimate; he knows that it is a contaminated site that will require clean up. He is encouraged that the traffic signal may improve existing and future conditions. He said he appreciated how the developers have been very up front and flexible.
Bonnie Belair said she was opposed feeling it was way too dense, but she now feels that the hardship has been addressed. She feels that there will be no perfect project; she knows everybody wants the site cleaned up. She hopes the other concerns can be worked out as the development goes on in the process.
Robin Stein reviewed the findings that the board needed to make in order to grant variances. She said that there must be unusual circumstances affecting the land or structures, literal enforcement of the ordinance would have to cause substantial hardship financial or otherwise, and that desirable relief may be granted if there is not substantial detriment to the public good, and if the relief does not derogate from the intent of the ordinance. She feels this is a unique and challenging site, and that the requirements for granting a variance have been met. She is pleased the applicant is going to work with the City on traffic mitigation. She said she believes the project fits within the bylaw. She feels that no project will ever be perfect and that there will never be agreement from
everyone on what should happen on with the site. She feels that throughout the review process the project that will continue to be shaped resulting in a better end product.
Beth Debski said that she feels that the project is a much better since the number of units was reduced and that the granting of the relief has been justified. She feels that many of the direct abutters are in support of the project. She is in support of the project.
Rebecca Curran said that she feels they are 90% in compliance with the buffer zone requirement. She said that the zoning ordinance says in black and white that variances are allowed. She said she would have felt more comfortable with a pro forma analysis. She is glad the project has been reduced.
There being no further questions of comments, Bonnie Belair made a motion to grant variances from lot area per dwelling unit, to allow for common building entrances, and to allow construction within the buffer area, subject to five standard conditions and three special conditions. The special conditions are that there are to be 13 affordable units as required by the NRCC zoning, 12 parking spaces are to be designated for use by residents of Flint Street, and a 30 ft easement as shown on the plans should be granted to the City of Salem to allow for the extension of Commercial Street. The motion was seconded by Steve Pinto and approved 6-0 (Stein, Debski, Curran, Pinto, Belair, Dionne).
Old/New Business
Discussion- Rescheduling November 21st Meeting for Thanksgiving Holiday The November meeting needs to be rescheduled. Amy Lash said there are currently no applications. The Board decided that the meeting is to be rescheduled to November 14th if there are three applications by Wednesday, October 24th and canceled if there aren’t enough applications
Discussion- Revised Board of Appeals Application Package Amy asked if everyone had a chance to look at the revised Board of Appeals package. Rebecca Curran said she had made a few notes about the plan requirements. Rebecca’s notes are going to be incorporated and Amy will send out the revised application again.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 pm
Respectfully submitted:
Amy J. Lash
Staff Planner
| 
