Last updated August 8, 2026
This page was written before the Conservation Commission voted. On July 21, 2026 the Commission closed the public hearing and issued a unanimous Order of Conditions. The asks below are closed and are kept as a record of what residents pressed for. See what it took.
We supported housing on the former South Campus. This page was about one thing: the public benefits that came with it, the trails, the overlooks, the riverfront restoration, and whether the Conservation Commission would write them into the final Order so they actually get built.
We wrote in good faith and with real respect for how the Commission handled this. The Commission closed the hearing on July 21 and approved its Order unanimously. Its written text has not been published yet, so what it binds in detail is not public.
In fairness
What was promised
They drew the trails to win the land, then called those same trails “not feasible” at the May 19 hearing. The terrain never changed.
Under public pressure, one connector came back on June 9, hedged with the words “to the extent practicable.” A commitment with an escape hatch built in.
Residents refused to let it slide, with letters by the hundred and testimony at hearing after hearing. None of the ground gained so far was gained on its own.
Credit where it is due
Every step forward on this project has the Commission’s fingerprints on it. That deserves to be said plainly, before we ask for anything more.
It refused to be rushed. When the applicant pushed to close the hearing and vote before the parking engineering even existed, the Commission held the hearing open until the plans could be seen.
It struck the hedge. Those four words, “to the extent practicable,” would have let the Loring Avenue trail quietly disappear. The Commission cut them from the record on June 16.
It ordered the site walk. Taking the trail questions onto the ground, not just the page, is part of what turned a vague intention into a written June 9 commitment.
That is the standard, and the Commission set it. We are asking for one thing only: that the final Order of Conditions live up to it.
What we asked of the Commission
These were the four asks residents put to the Commission before its July 21 vote. Each was within the Commission’s power. The Order passed unanimously, and until its written text is published we cannot say which of these it adopted.
No vote in the dark. The Commission already held the hearing open once rather than vote before the parking engineering existed. Hold that same line to the finish: no final vote until the final civil plans are in hand.
Make every June 9 commitment binding. The Loring Avenue trail, written into the recorded easement “in perpetuity,” with a fallback if MassDOT does not approve its end. An intention in a letter is not a condition in an Order.
Do not approve a stripped-down plan. The trail network and overlooks from the winning proposal were still missing, and the Volunteers Bridge was never part of this filing at all. A plan that quietly drops them is not the plan that won the bid. Outcome · the Loring connector was restored; the wider network and overlooks were not
Secure the restoration. Back the riverfront plantings with money held in escrow, and carry the maintenance and survival commitments through to completion, not just two years.
Our view
We are not asking the Commission to stop the housing. We are asking it to make sure the housing arrives with everything the public was owed: written down, funded, and enforceable. Not a wish list. Conditions.
Who holds the vote
These are the members of the Salem Conservation Commission, from the City’s own roster. The vote on this project is theirs to take.
Roles and eligibility are set by the City and can change. As listed June 25, 2026.
Commissioner Hoskins
Commissioner DelNegro
Commissioner Marcoux
Commissioner Ricciarelli
Commissioner Marchese
Commissioner Campbell
Commissioner Jacob
After the vote
A public vote is a public record. When the Commission decides, we will report the outcome plainly, the same way whether it is the result we hoped for or one we did not.
Given how carefully this Commission has worked the project so far, we expect it to hold the developer to its word. Nothing would suit us better than to have nothing to report but a standard kept.
The watch list
A new file number
The project is DEP File #064-0825. A continuance keeps it. A re-file gets a new number for the same address. The clearest single sign.
A fresh newspaper notice
A new legal ad naming the site and a new hearing date. The re-advertising step, in plain sight.
New notices in neighbors’ mail
Fresh certified notices to abutters mean a new application was filed.
How the agenda reads
“Continued” with the same number means it rolls forward. A new “Notice of Intent” line means a fresh start.
A fuller table
All seven members seated, instead of the smaller group before, is the larger pool a re-file opens.
How it resolved
The applicant withdrew #064-0825 and re-filed as #064-0831 on June 30. The Commission voted on that refiling on July 21.
The Commission set the standard, and residents showing up is what kept it set. That is worth remembering: the improvements to this project did not arrive on their own. One ask is still open, and it belongs to the City.
The public hearing is closed and the Order of Conditions passed unanimously.
What residents asked the Commission to require
The redevelopment could not be built without work inside the 25-foot No-Disturb Zone and the 100-foot Wetlands Buffer. That waiver was discretionary, which gave the Conservation Commission room to attach conditions. This is what residents asked its Order to require. It is kept here as a record of the ask. The Commission issued a unanimous Order on July 21, and its written text has not been published yet.
Not a wish list. Each item is something the developer itself proposed to win this public land.
Build the trail network they proposed
The accessible footpaths and overlooks on the western and southern sides, plus the new path connection toward the Forest River and the re-established trailhead, all shown in their own proposal and Site Plan. Completed before the first certificate of occupancy.
Deliver the public art they said they would
Their proposal stated they would engage Salem’s art community and the Salem State University art department under Salem’s Public Art Master Plan. The Order should hold them to that stated intent.
Deeded public access
Public parking guaranteed at the Forest River trailhead via an easement recorded at closing, so people can actually reach the trails.
Make the June 9 commitments binding
The Loring Avenue trail and its “in perpetuity” access written into the recorded easement and the Order itself, not left as a consultant’s letter, with a required fallback route if MassDOT does not approve the Loring Avenue end, and maintenance that continues beyond the proposed two-year monitoring window.
“The campus is going away, the access shouldn’t.”
How to Act