Lowe's/Wal-Mart Project Gets Thumbs Up From Planning Board
After nine months, the Board unanimously okays the Highland Avenue project.
The Planning Board unanimously approved the controversial Lowe’s/Wal-Mart project on Highland Avenue on Thursday night.
The long-awaited vote came during the Board's 16th meeting, spanning nine months, on the proposed project by the Kennedy Development Corp. Now, the project faces scrutiny from the Conservation Commission and an even more comprehensive review by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the state Department of Transportation.
The project was approved with about two dozen conditions that address issues ranging from where trucks will be parked during construction to what trees will be planted along a 15-foot sound barrier wall and what color the wall will be.
Board member Randy Clarke, who declared himself “not a fan of big box stores,” summed up what many Board members thought.
“This project is not perfect, but the drainage [at the site] will be better and traffic [on Highland Avenue] will be better. It is a better project for the work we have done," he said.
Helen Sides, another board member, said she supports the project because “Salem needs more revenue.” Board Member Christine Sullivan said having a new Lowe's and an expanded Wal-Mart will create badly needed jobs.
The new and expanded stores, according to Salem Mayor Kimberley Driscoll, will generate $225,000 in new tax revenue and create more than 100 jobs.
Joseph Correnti, the attorney for the Kennedy Development Group, told the Board he was "pleased with where the project ended up."
"We believe it will be beneficial to the city," he said.
He acknowledged that winning the Planning Board's approval is just “the first major step” in the permitting process.
Residents from Salem and Lynn, who have been present at the meetings over the past nine months, filled the City Hall Annex to hear the Board’s decision.
The dozen speakers at the hearing before the Board closed off public comments were about evenly divided. Most of the Lynn residents, including Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy, and a few Salem residents, came to oppose the project. They have argued for months that the new stores will make traffic and drainage issues even worse.
A new complaint was that the large stores will hurt sales in downtown Salem. Sullivan, a board member, strongly disagreed. “Downtown Salem is booming, better than it has since the 1950s,” she said.
Other complaints about the project were that it would hurt the environment, raise property values and desecrate Indian tribal lands.
The Board disagreed with most of the objections and agreed with the developer and the Board's consulting engineers that the drainage plans “will improve the existing pre-development condition of the site and surrounding neighborhoods.”
The Kennedy Group agreed to give the city of Lynn $60,000 to improve drainage issues in the nearby neighborhood. It has already identified a broken storm water runoff pipe in the Buchanan Circle neighborhood that is malfunctioning.
Similarly, the Kennedy Group agreed to donate $75,000 to fund a new traffic study to identify ways to improve traffic on Highland Avenue from Swampscott Road to the Pep Boys shop.
At the start of the hearing, the developer also announced it had worked out an agreement with the developer of the Apple Hill community to plant from 80 to 100 evergreen trees to shield the residents' view of a new 15-foot sound wall.
The Board members had a few other suggestions for Lowe's and Wal-Mart. Clarke and Sides said they wish the two buildings had solar panels to reduce their impact on the environment and pave the way for smaller companies to afford solar panels.
Sullivan urged Lowe's to take “a few sheets from the Wal-Mart playbook” and design the new building with recycled materials.
“I never thought I would praise Wal-Mart for anything,” she said.
Carolyn Costain
9:35 am on Friday, January 14, 2011
I get a bit angry when I see environmental groups oppose plans that create new jobs. It only takes one person that just doesn't want something in their neighborhood to create and convince others that a project is worse than the facts, it would actually better some things. It only takes one screaming "me-me". " I know", I was an environmental activist on the 128 interchange project that saved 9 homes in Beverly, and worked on saving our water supply But I put my foot down when the screaming"me-me's" in the group on other projects, were not really looking at what was best overall but what they personally didn't want, so they would convince others that a project was going to destroy their neighborhood. I have seen this happen on every project for over 11 years of working with environmentalist groups in Beverly in the past, and I have to say to people in Salem to really look into a project in your neighborhood and the good it will do overall and if there is just one person running around trying to convince you that the project needs to be stopped? Think again! because that one screaming "me-me" may be steering you wrong for selfish reason's. Every city has a 20 year plan, everything from schools closing to fire station's. and area's to be built upon. The plans are there for anyone to go and get a summary version of, so you can view the future of your neighborhoods. Also get a copy of the 20 year Transportation maps for your area.
Sarah Shribman-Adelman
11:35 am on Saturday, January 15, 2011
Dear Carolyn Costain:
Getting angry about opposition to any project for any reason is a way to stay off balance. Should former City Councilor Walsh of Lynn be successful with a suit in Land Court; the project may be halted for years. She, Walsh, makes a good point about the Land Trust Documents, there seems to be a conflict.
I don't like additional development to Highland Avenue without traffic relief to the terrible traffic problems. This is a wavered project. Absent the waivers to the LAW, the project could not continue. They forgot GREEN because it would have made the project, economically inviable.
Allowing the healthy discussion of opposing views with CIVILITY is more important than the decision. I don't think this battle is over. Like the ZBA's decision is being challenged in court, this may also end up in front of a Judge. The project is only one court order away from an appeal.
The Walsh complaint is about protecting children the way the land donor intended. Some think this project does protect the intended beneficiaries of the Land Trust, some do not. Why those who opposed didn't take the handle "a vote for the project is a vote against children". So you don't have to be angry with the tree huggers; just those who love children.
Carolyn Costain
7:55 pm on Saturday, January 15, 2011
I have always been a tree hugger and "I do" have children that I love very much. I have also seen how hard it is for our children to acquire jobs in this economy. I stopped hugging some of those tree's that my children use to climb, to make a future path into the work force. "I am thinking of the children, when I have hopes that projects will go through to create the future jobs." Those children you hide behind to stop a project? Will soon become adults and you can be the one to tell them that they might not have a job? but you saved them a tree! Today the DEP and EPA and the Conservation Com. Planning dep. All have strict rules of mitigating any potential problems that are reviewed in the planning stage. There is always going to be a "you" on any project. Allowing the building jobs for the future is what seems to be in the best interest of all our children. Our children do not stay children for long.
Sarah Shribman-Adelman
9:34 am on Monday, January 17, 2011
That is when the child is an adult and no longer a child. The trust is to benefit minor children so they can enjoy "nature"; not a development. With a friend suffering with a lethal condition as a direct result of exposure to regulated DEP and EPA not doing their jobs properly, development of duplicate products and services available within five miles of the development; it is simply a duplication, not improvement.
You have chosen to discount me as an undesirable and that's your choice. There are child labor jobs, but I presume your children are adults. Blaming other people, places, and things for the failure of your children's ability to find work may be the reason they can't be employed. Walmart and Lowes are not demanding of highly educated; highly skilled employees. With "needs improvement" as a passing MCAS grade speaks to Public School performance.
Outside of taxes I see no Life Style improvement from the project. Maybe it will be stopped in Court, maybe it will not. I haven't spoken with Former Lynn City Councilor Walsh since she has been in office. The complaint to the A.G. was made by two women from Lynn, not me. "There is always going to be a 'you' on any project. " Well, I have only made comments against the project as have the Lynn City Council, Mayor of Lynn and many others. So, there are more than "one" who objects.
So, the "strict rules of mitigation any potential problems" do exist. The enforcement do not exist or the rules are ignored.
Carolyn Costain
2:02 pm on Monday, January 17, 2011
My two son's, one of which served our country and is fresh out of the Navy with a Vet, status, is going to college. My oldest works for an ambulance comp. I am talking about all the other teens out there and parents that need jobs! Did you ever stop to think that creating jobs, just might put some people back to work so they can keep a roof over their child's head? A lot of people are worse off than you or I. They don't have the luxury of staying home with their children to fight for a" Tree" to play in, they are to busy just trying to survive this economy. The whole purpose of life, is survival and if we have to cut a tree in order to create jobs for people to survive? Than so be it! Tree's can be replanted to mitigate any loss. The loss of family homes from foreclosure and up rooting children from those homes because there is no jobs available is devastating. " No I have no mortgage on my home" but I have enough heart to think about those that do! Every project that creates jobs for people is a blessing! People are more important than a tree that can be replaced! Activist need to do what I did as an activist. You need really to get out of that cozy parlor, to see those businessmen and woman that are eating in the food pantries. People that lost those cozy homes." Millions are without jobs! blocking projects to create jobs, is a very "Selfish act" in today's economy. You really need to look at both sides of the street and start looking at the people , not just trees!
Sarah Shribman-Adelman
3:05 pm on Monday, January 17, 2011
Dear Carol:
Please extend my thanks for the Service to our country by your son. It appears, from what you say, the outlook for your Navel Veteran son is very good.
You present as a "HOLIER THAN THOU" person. I believe the SELFISHNESS you claim is your own, not those who go back to the documents of the donation of the land. Are you considering the donors of the land, SELFISH also?
What about the people who left the land for the use of minor children? The land was donated to a charity who has decided to sell the land. There are questions unanswered about the charity's actions with respect to the grant of land the charity accepted. Is the act of granting the land to the charity the "selfish act" or is my suggesting that the project may be halted because the charity maybe doesn't have the right to sell their gifted land is a "selfish act"?
I don't believe the gift of land with restrictions is a "selfish act"; though careful pointing fingers, some may say Carolyn Costain is selfish and wants another's charitable act of gifting land, to be reversed for her own SELFISH HOPES.
KlassySalem
11:48 am on Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Who will be selfish in 3 years if Camp Lion is not allowed to sell this land and as a result ceases to exist due to financial hardship?
Carolyn Costain
9:16 pm on Tuesday, January 18, 2011
I am sorry but "I look at both sides of the street! It's apparent that you are on a one way street! I hope that , that charity sells because the money can go to good use helping the poor and children. "I had to laugh when you called me selfish." I bet the likes of you, has never shown your face over at the Lifebridge stores buying things you might never use but knowing that what you spend goes to feed the hungry. Think twice before you try to label me. Try looking in the mirror when you say the word "selfish" cutting a tree to create jobs is what is needed in today's economy. Like I said before "tree's can be replanted." I think any charity whom had land donated, has every right to sell, as long as the proceeds go towards the homeless children and parents that have no jobs! My very last word on this issue is the fact that " "My hopes of putting people to work is not being the selfish one here! Its like I said from the start. " There is always one screaming "me me" on every project" and in your letters you have proved my point. Good Day!
Sarah Shribman-Adelman
9:48 pm on Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Dear Ms. Costain:
I was referring to both sides or all sides of the issue, not the street. What about the Bennetts who donated the land? They had an intended purpose; for the enjoyment of minor children, not a commercial development. My suggestion to the Board is to consider disbanding the camp; donating the land to Boy Scouts of America or Girl Scouts of America; YMCA; JCC; or a financially viable charity to continue the donor of the land's intended purpose.
You simply want things your way; because you believe you are correct; with no basis. Should a court decide that the sale was not a legal sale; due to restrictions of the granting trust; then the land would need to be returned to its intended use. I have worked with former Lynn City Councilor Walsh, neither of us are trying to stop jobs, or oppose cutting of trees. But we both have a Spiritual side; and the gift of those who have left this earth for an eternal life; should not be forgotten.
Yes, honoring the deceased, who live with us in Spirit. I had and have no objection to the North Shore Shopping Center or it's recent expansion. There was a farmer who sold his land to a developer, that's fair. This is very different, because of the source of the land. With the focus on GREEN today, I'm surprised it is allowed to go forward without being GREEN; but GREED comes first.