Swampscott Planning Board Meeting Review: Glover Residences (299 Salem St) - December 12, 2022

Section 1: Agenda

Based on the transcript, the likely agenda for the meeting focused primarily on the continued public hearing for the Glover Residences project:

Call to Order & Opening Remarks (0:02:21)
- Chairperson Ippolito opens the hybrid meeting, noting the focus on traffic and circulation.
Continued Public Hearing: Site Plan Review SPR22-03 - 299 Salem Street (Glover Residences at Vinnin Square) (0:06:54)
- Project Team Introduction & Overview (0:09:26)
  - Thad Simasco (SBA Design) introduces the project team members present.
- Traffic & Circulation Update (0:10:35)
  - Presentation by Jeffrey Durbin (Aspen Associates) on traffic assessment, peer review response, and proposed mitigation measures (signal timing, crosswalks).
  - Extensive Board discussion on Vinnin Square/Paradise Road intersection issues, synchronization, and existing problems (0:20:23).
  - Proposal by Chairperson Ippolito for a roundabout at Salem/Vinnin intersection (0:27:18). Discussion on feasibility, scope, potential collaboration (Board, Paul Feldman).
  - Board discussion regarding resident petition for a new traffic study (0:56:37).
- Internal Site Design & Layout Discussion (1:02:42)
  - Proposal by Chairperson Ippolito to reconfigure Building 1 (eliminate ground floor units for parking, add units to Building 2) to increase green space (1:02:42). Discussion on feasibility and aesthetics (Board, Thad Simasco).
- Utilities & Infrastructure Updates
  - Power Supply Clarification (Steve Moderano, Ted Lang) (1:22:04)
  - EV Charging Stations (Thad Simasco, Ted Lang) (1:23:53)
  - Affordable Housing AMI Clarification (Bill Goss, Ted Lang) (1:24:49)
  - Fire Safety Review & Coordination (Thad Simasco, Board) (1:26:07)
  - Civil Engineering: Site Circulation, Drainage, Water Supply (Steve Moderano, Board) (1:31:23)
  - Landscaping Plan Update & Committee Feedback (Jay Emperor, Board, Verena O’Malley) (1:40:15)
- Historic Preservation Update (1:44:53)
  - Review of Historical Commission meeting, proposed salvage of artifacts, documentation efforts (Thad Simasco, Chair Ippolito).
Public Comment (1:51:08)
- Comments on historic preservation process and significance (Molly Booth, Duncan Maitland, Douglas Maitland) (1:52:26)
- Comments on tree preservation and landscaping (Verena O’Malley - Tree Committee Chair) (2:08:02)
- Comments on bicycle safety and building energy efficiency (Ryan Hale - Renewable Energy Committee Chair) (2:13:16)
Board Deliberation & Procedural Discussion (2:25:26)
- Final clarifications (Gas/Electric, Chimney Location).
- Discussion on meeting schedule, statutory deadlines, and need for extension (2:26:25).
Vote to Continue Public Hearing (2:37:21)
- Motion to continue the hearing to January 17, 2023.
Adjournment (2:37:47)
- Motion to adjourn.

(Note: Agenda items regarding approval of previous minutes and other business were not explicitly addressed in the provided transcript portion focused on the Glover Residences hearing.)

Section 2: Speaking Attendees

Based on the transcript and contextual knowledge of Swampscott government roles:

Angela Ippolito (Planning Board Chair): [Speaker 1]
Thad Simasco (SBA Design - Project Architect): [Speaker 2], [Speaker 21]
Jeffrey Durbin (Aspen Associates - Project Traffic Consultant): [Speaker 3]
Steve Moderano (Boulder Associates - Project Civil Engineer): [Speaker 4]
David Korn (Planning Board Member): [Speaker 5]
Paul Feldman (Project Counsel - Leggat McCall): [Speaker 6]
Jay Emperor (SBA Design - Project Landscape Architect): [Speaker 7]
Duncan Maitland (Swampscott Historical Society): [Speaker 8]
Michael Propeck (Planning Board Member): [Speaker 9]
Ryan Hale (Chair, Renewable Energy Committee / Town Meeting Member): [Speaker 10]
Ted Lang (Planning Board Member): [Speaker 11]
Verena O’Malley (Chair, Swampscott Tree Committee): [Speaker 12]
Planning Board Member (Name Not Stated): [Speaker 13]
Marissa Meaney (Planning Board Staff/Administrator): [Speaker 14], [Speaker 20]
Molly Booth (Swampscott Historical Society Member): [Speaker 15] (Name inferred from context)
Douglas Maitland (Former Historical Commission Member / Public Commenter): [Speaker 16]
Bill Goss (Leggat McCall Properties - Developer Representative): [Speaker 18], [Speaker 19]
[Speaker 17]: (Insufficient context to identify)

Section 3: Meeting Minutes

Meeting: Swampscott Planning Board Date: December 12, 2022 (Inferred based on context, metadata lacks date) Subject: Continued Public Hearing for Site Plan SPR22-03: 299 Salem Street (Glover Residences at Vinnin Square)

Attendees (Identified from Transcript):

Planning Board: Angela Ippolito (Chair), David Korn, Michael Propeck, Ted Lang, Member (Name Not Stated)
Planning Board Staff: Marissa Meaney
Applicant Team (Leggat McCall Properties / Consultants): Thad Simasco (Architect), Jeffrey Durbin (Traffic), Steve Moderano (Civil), Paul Feldman (Counsel), Jay Emperor (Landscape), Bill Goss (Developer Rep)
Public Commenters: Duncan Maitland (Historical Society), Ryan Hale (REC Chair/TM Member), Verena O’Malley (Tree Committee Chair), Molly Booth (Historical Society Member), Douglas Maitland (Former Historical Commission Member)

Proceedings:

The meeting, a continuation of the public hearing for the Glover Residences project, was opened by Chairperson Ippolito, noting it was a hybrid meeting with a focus on traffic/circulation (0:02:21).

Traffic and Circulation (Primary Focus): (0:10:35)

Project Traffic Consultant Jeffrey Durbin presented updates based on peer review, highlighting compliance with MassDOT standards and coordination with a 2016 MPO study. He asserted the project’s 40-50 peak hour trips wouldn’t significantly impact intersection operations (delay <10 sec, queues +2-3 vehicles) ([0:11:00 - 0:13:45]).
Proposed mitigation included signal retiming/coordination (especially Salem/Vinnin & Paradise/Vinnin) to prevent queuing (0:14:48), crosswalk relocation/upgrades near Sunbeam Lane (0:15:50), and significant pedestrian improvements at the Salem/Vinnin intersection, including a new crosswalk directly connecting the site exit to the shopping center (0:16:45) - noted by Member Korn as a change from previous plans (0:18:24). Post-occupancy signal optimization was also committed (0:19:36).
Extensive Board Discussion on Vinnin Square Intersections: Chairperson Ippolito detailed the existing dysfunction at the Salem/Vinnin and Paradise/Vinnin lights, emphasizing frequent backups (0:20:23). Member Korn described the problematic lack of synchronization causing gridlock (0:25:17). Mr. Durbin acknowledged these symptoms indicate a system needing repair/retiming, which the project mitigation aims to address (0:26:13). Member Korn viewed fixing this synchronization as a potential “betterment” (0:26:49).
Roundabout Proposal: Chairperson Ippolito proposed exploring a roundabout at the Salem/Vinnin intersection, potentially using underutilized land in the adjacent shopping center (Staples lot) (0:27:18). She framed it as a way to change traffic behavior and improve flow/pedestrian safety, acknowledging it involves Salem and significant cost/complexity (0:28:20, 0:35:23). Member Korn, initially skeptical, acknowledged the success of Salem roundabouts (0:33:57). Mr. Durbin noted the benefits but also the high cost (>$1M) and land acquisition needs, suggesting it’s beyond the project’s scope (0:35:23). Project Counsel Paul Feldman agreed it’s a major undertaking but stated willingness to cooperate and potentially redirect project mitigation funds if a viable roundabout plan emerges (0:45:42, 0:48:40). Board members Lang and the unnamed member expressed strong support for investigating the roundabout vigorously (0:50:30, 0:51:26). The discussion clarified this exploration would be on a separate track and not hold up the project’s approval process (0:53:26, 0:54:41).
Resident Traffic Study Petition: The Board discussed a resident petition requesting a new traffic study due to concerns about COVID-era data (0:56:37). Members Korn, Ippolito, Lang, and Propeck generally agreed that while resident concerns are valid, a new study likely wouldn’t change the fundamental need for intersection improvements and might not be the best use of resources, especially given the planned post-occupancy signal adjustments (0:56:49 - 1:00:42).

Internal Site Design: (1:02:42)

Chairperson Ippolito proposed a significant design change: remove Building 1’s ground floor units, convert that space to underground parking, and add those 12 units as a fifth floor on Building 2 (1:02:42). Her rationale focused on improving marketability (addressing less desirable ground-floor units on Salem St, providing underground parking for Building 1), increasing green space, reducing impervious surface, and enhancing streetscape aesthetics (1:04:00, 1:08:36). She acknowledged needing board support to waive height limits for Building 2.
Project Architect Thad Simasco expressed initial concerns about losing the active residential frontage on Salem Street (1:12:16) and the feasibility/cost of excavating for parking versus adding a floor (1:17:03). Board members expressed curiosity to see the design implications (1:09:19, 1:16:34). The applicant team agreed to review the feasibility (1:09:15). Member Propeck noted potential benefits for green space and even contributing land towards a future roundabout (1:11:09).

Utilities, Infrastructure, and Amenities:

Power will be sourced separately for the Swampscott (National Grid) and Marblehead (Municipal Light Plant) portions (1:22:35).
34 EV charging station heads (17 double stations) planned (15% of spots), with conduit for 100% future capability (1:24:03). Commitment made to meet future 20% code requirement (2:22:42).
Affordable units set at 80% AMI per town requirements (1:25:06). A plan showing distribution is pending (1:51:09).
Fire safety review coordinated with Swampscott and Marblehead chiefs resulted in agreements on access, connections, control panels, Knox boxes, BDA systems, etc. (1:26:21). A request for non-vehicular emergency access behind Building 2 is being addressed (1:28:20, 1:42:33).
Civil updates included traffic calming (raised crosswalk) (1:32:18), Blue Bike station placement (1:34:03), confirmation of drainage patterns (all discharging treated/reduced flow to Salem) (1:34:30), and coordination with Swampscott DPW on water connections (good condition line) (1:37:34). Peer review comments are being addressed (1:39:06).
Landscaping updates included path adjustments, evergreen screening, coordination with the golf course for fencing, and commitment to review Tree Committee species recommendations (1:40:58). Parking lot buffer requirements per zoning were discussed (2:08:02), with the team agreeing to review/integrate islands (2:10:43).

Historic Preservation: (1:44:53, 1:52:26)

Thad Simasco summarized discussions with the Historical Commission, including plans to salvage artifacts (iron fencing, lampposts, sundial) for incorporation into a memorial/marker area (1:46:35), commission Form B documentation (1:47:18), archaeological sensitivity during demolition (1:47:32), and openness to exploring moving structures if feasible (1:47:47). He noted the original Glover House structure appears heavily compromised, with limited original framing visible, though the central chimney remains (1:45:01).
Chairperson Ippolito emphasized the historical significance of the site and requested careful, documented deconstruction (not wrecking ball) of the original house footprint/foundation (1:50:08).
Public commenters Molly Booth, Duncan Maitland, and Douglas Maitland (representing Historical Society and former Commission roles) voiced strong concerns about losing the 18th-century structure, inquired about the demolition delay process, stressed the importance of the site (Glover, Blaney comparison), asked about internal features (chimney arch), and suggested documenting/reconstructing a room (1:52:26 - 2:02:38). They also highlighted the need for coordination between the Historical Commission and Historical Society (1:53:56, 1:55:29). Douglas Maitland specifically requested documentation be placed on the town website (2:05:20). The applicant team confirmed the building’s unsafe condition but willingness to share photos and allow salvage if resources are found (2:04:45, 2:25:55). Chairperson Ippolito encouraged collaboration between historical groups and exploration of resources (Lynn Museum, Mass Historical) (1:54:20, 2:02:38).

Energy Efficiency & Sustainability: (2:13:16)

Ryan Hale (REC Chair) inquired about bicycle safety (addressed under Traffic) and energy efficiency.
Thad Simasco outlined plans targeting LEED Silver certifiable standards (2:17:51), including high R-values, solar readiness (potentially panels), electric heat pumps for HVAC, Energy Star appliances, HERS rating, commissioning, recycling/composting, and indoor air quality measures (2:18:38 - 2:21:02). The project will meet the current stretch code and aims for state-of-the-art but stops short of Passive House (2:20:00).
Commitments included evaluating pervious pavement (2:21:12), achieving 20% EV readiness (2:22:42), and exploring alternatives to natural gas for domestic hot water (currently planned) (2:21:36, 2:22:12). Electric cooking is planned (2:25:26). Mr. Hale offered REC assistance (2:23:06).

Procedural:

The Board and Applicant Counsel Paul Feldman discussed the timeline. The statutory deadline was approaching (mid-late January). Chairperson Ippolito expressed concern about meeting the deadline due to lost time (zoning approval delay, holidays) and lack of planner support, suggesting a February extension was needed (2:26:25, 2:31:36).
After discussion confirming the process for extension requests and potential meeting dates around the MLK holiday, the applicant and board agreed to reschedule the next meeting (2:30:19 - 2:35:51).
Motion: To continue the public hearing to January 17, 2023. Moved, Seconded, Passed Unanimously (2:37:23).
Motion: To adjourn. Moved, Seconded, Passed Unanimously (2:37:47).

Section 4: Executive Summary

The Swampscott Planning Board held a lengthy continued public hearing on December 12, 2022, for the proposed 140-unit Glover Residences project at 299 Salem Street in Vinnin Square. Key discussions and outcomes relevant to Swampscott residents include:

Traffic Congestion & Potential Solutions:

Mitigation Plan: The developer’s traffic consultant presented updates following a peer review, outlining plans to mitigate the project’s impact (estimated at 40-50 peak hour trips) (0:11:00). This includes retiming traffic signals at the challenging Vinnin St/Salem St and Vinnin St/Paradise Rd intersections to improve synchronization and reduce backups (0:14:48), upgrading pedestrian crosswalks, and adding a new crossing from the site to the shopping center (0:16:45).
Roundabout Idea: Acknowledging persistent traffic issues predating this project, Planning Board Chair Angela Ippolito proposed exploring a modern roundabout at the Vinnin St/Salem St intersection (0:27:18). While complex and costly (likely over $1M and requiring land from adjacent properties/Salem), the Board and developer expressed willingness to investigate this as a potential long-term improvement, separate from the current project approval (0:45:42, 0:50:30). This reflects the Board responding proactively to widespread resident concerns about Vinnin Square gridlock.
Resident Petition: The Board addressed a resident petition requesting a new traffic study, concluding that while concerns are valid, re-studying traffic may not yield significantly different results or solutions compared to the proposed mitigation and planned post-construction adjustments (0:56:37). The focus remains on implementing physical improvements.

Site Design & Community Fit:

Potential Redesign: Chairperson Ippolito suggested a significant change to the site plan: removing ground-floor apartments in the building closest to Salem Street, converting that level to parking, and adding those units as a fifth floor on another building (1:02:42). The goal is to create more green space, improve the street view, and potentially enhance unit desirability. The developer agreed to study the feasibility (1:09:15). This discussion highlights the Board’s focus on maximizing community benefit (aesthetics, open space) from large projects.
Sustainability: Responding to public comment from the Renewable Energy Committee Chair Ryan Hale (2:13:16), the developer outlined plans targeting high energy efficiency (LEED Silver certifiable), including electric heat pumps, solar readiness, high insulation values, and EV charging (committing to meet the new 20% requirement) (2:17:51). While aiming for state-of-the-art, the project currently includes natural gas for hot water, though alternatives are being explored (2:21:43). Cooking will be electric (2:25:26).

Historic Glover Homestead:

Preservation Concerns: Significant discussion occurred regarding the dilapidated Glover Homestead structure on site, dating potentially to the 1730s-1780s (1:44:53). Representatives from the Swampscott Historical Society and former Historical Commission members urged preservation efforts, emphasizing the building’s connection to Revolutionary War General John Glover (1:55:58).
Salvage & Documentation: The developer reported the original structure is heavily compromised but committed to salvaging historic artifacts (lampposts, fencing, sundial) for an on-site marker (1:46:35), funding historical documentation (Form B) (1:47:18), and allowing careful, documented deconstruction of the original foundation area (1:50:08). The possibility of moving salvageable elements (like the chimney) exists if external resources/groups undertake the effort (1:53:34, 2:25:55).

Next Steps:

The public hearing was continued to January 17, 2023, to allow the Board and applicant time to review the extensive information discussed and for the Board to prepare draft findings and conditions (2:37:23). The Board acknowledged needing more time due to project complexities and procedural delays.

Significance for Swampscott: This project represents a major development in a highly visible, traffic-congested area bordering Salem and Marblehead. The Board’s deliberations reflect attempts to balance development rights with mitigating traffic impacts, maximizing community benefits (green space, sustainability), addressing resident concerns, and respecting the site’s significant historical context. The potential Vinnin Square roundabout discussion, though preliminary, signals a proactive approach to a long-standing town problem.

Section 5: Analysis

This Planning Board meeting showcased a complex interplay between development procedures, community concerns, and the Board’s proactive, though sometimes unconventional, approach to problem-solving, grounded solely in the transcript’s evidence.

Board Dynamics & Chair’s Influence:

Chairperson Ippolito demonstrated strong leadership, actively shaping the discussion beyond standard procedural oversight. Her proposals for both the Vinnin Square roundabout (0:27:18) and the significant building reconfiguration (1:02:42) were bold strokes aimed at addressing core issues (traffic, site aesthetics/green space) but also pushed the boundaries of typical site plan review mitigation. While framed as exploratory, these suggestions significantly steered the conversation.
Other Board members appeared generally aligned on the severity of the Vinnin Square traffic issue and supported exploring the roundabout concept (0:50:30, 0:51:26), indicating shared frustration with the status quo. There seemed to be more tentative curiosity than full endorsement regarding the building redesign proposal (1:09:19, 1:16:34), awaiting feasibility feedback.
The Board’s handling of the traffic study petition (0:56:37) demonstrated a pragmatic approach, balancing acknowledgment of resident concern with reliance on expert analysis (peer review validation) and the perceived limited utility of a new study versus focusing on tangible improvements.

Applicant Team’s Strategy:

The developer’s team, particularly Traffic Consultant Jeffrey Durbin and Counsel Paul Feldman, presented a competent and prepared front. Mr. Durbin defended the traffic study methodology and findings robustly, anchoring arguments in professional standards and peer review agreement (0:11:00).
Mr. Feldman adeptly managed expectations regarding the scope of project mitigation versus broader infrastructure upgrades (0:45:42). While expressing openness to cooperating on the roundabout, he clearly positioned it as a separate, complex initiative beyond the developer’s direct responsibility, effectively protecting the project timeline and budget while appearing collaborative.
Architect Thad Simasco responded thoughtfully to the redesign proposal, raising valid points about active street frontage and construction costs (1:12:16, 1:17:03), while agreeing to investigate feasibility – a standard professional response to maintain goodwill while assessing impacts.
The team showed responsiveness on sustainability (2:17:51) and historic artifact salvage (1:46:35), agreeing to numerous specific requests from the Board and public, likely aiming to build consensus towards approval.

Public Comment Impact:

The impassioned comments from historical advocates (Duncan Maitland, Douglas Maitland, Molly Booth) (1:52:26 forward) clearly resonated with the Board (particularly the Chair) and likely reinforced the commitment to careful demolition and documentation (1:50:08). However, the commenters’ desire for fuller preservation seemed constrained by the building’s poor condition and the project’s momentum.
Input from committee chairs (Verena O’Malley - Trees 2:08:02, Ryan Hale - Renewable Energy 2:13:16) yielded specific commitments from the developer on landscaping adjustments and enhanced energy efficiency measures (EV charging levels, exploring gas alternatives), demonstrating the influence of focused, expert public input within the process.

Overall Meeting Effectiveness: