“Village” gets continuance; ZBA grants three months
Published on February 19th, 2003
STONEHAM, MA - Amidst the frustrated whispers and animated chatter of residents gathered to voice their protests over a townhouse development at Isabella and Christopher Streets, the Stoneham Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to grant a three month continuance for a state-mandated public hearing.
At the onset of last Thursday’s scheduled public hearing for the proposed 20-unit Highland Village, an attorney representing Malden based developer R. Donato & Sons requested that the board grant a continuance until May 8th for the hearing, citing that various engineers and architects could not be in attendance.
After immediately voting to accept the request for an extension, zoning board chairman William Sullivan attempted to calm the dense crowd of residents, saying that the continuance acted in the best interests of all involved parties.
"We had to have this meeting before 30-days. There’s an awful lot of information to go over," said Sullivan of the board’s decision. "I understand that a lot of you guys are frustrated but we have to do what’s in the best interests of this town…It’s not going to be just one meeting. It’s going to be many," the chairman added after quieting a resident who demanded to know why the developer wasn’t prepared.
Many of the residents’ concerns center on the developer’s decision to file for chapter 40B protection, a state statute meant to encourage affordable housing projects. According to the law, a developer may skirt some local zoning and building requirements if they agree to dedicate 25 percent of its units to affordable housing.
In order to qualify for chapter 40B, a developer must build in a city or town whose total percentage of affordable housing is less than the state requirement of 10 percent. While local planning and zoning boards may deny a developer’s request to build, the state’s Housing Appeal Committee could overturn the decision based on that town’s failure to meet affordable housing guidelines.
Acknowledging that chapter 40B addresses a legitimate need for affordable housing, some residents affected by the proposed development accuse the developer of manipulating the law to advance a project riddled with public safety issues.
"I think probably it’s some way he’s trying to strongarm the neighborhood. He’s trying to manipulate the state law for his own purposes so he can get waivers and permits…That’s just my impression," said Stoneham resident John Mitchell of Isabella Street.
According to Mitchell and his wife Erica, the proposed construction site’s narrow streets will severely restrict access for fire trucks and emergency response vehicles, a claim backed by Stoneham Fire Captain Jim Mclaughlin.
"I have a list of things I’m concerned about," said Mclaughlin, who met with several town department heads at the beginning of the month to discuss the development. "Access is one of those concerns. We have to have access to get our apparatus up and down there. The only problem is to what extent we have a say," Mclaughin added, referring to the complications of chapter 40B.
Residents are also concerned with the possibility that the flood-prone neighborhood could experience further drainage problems after the company blasts through several feet of rock ledge at the project-site.
Claiming that the developer would work closely with the town, Will Adams, the project manager for the Highland Village, claimed that R. Donato & Sons would address all blasting and access concerns at future meetings.
"Just for the record, we’re trying to work closely with the town and the local residents as well. In regards to the blasting, we’ll do it in accordance with all the town and state laws and do it as safely as possible," said Adams.
Despite Adam’s assurances, Erica Mitchell still expressed suspicion with the developer’s motives, stating a checkered history with the property owners. Specifically, Mitchell referred to a failed bid by the company to build three houses on the property two years ago. To safeguard the neighborhood’s interests, Mitchell met with about 40 impacted residents at her house last Monday to address the proposal.
"We formed an ad hoc committee to research various aspects of the proposal. We have a person addressing chapter 40 issues, environmental impacts, and fire safety. We’ll definitely have an opportunity to give our imput," said Mitchell, who thought the continuance provided an excellent opportunity for residents to properly prepare for the public hearing.
Despite the Mitchell’s concerns with the size of the development, the couple doesn’t deny that the property owners have a right to develop some of the land. Instead, they and other residents only wish the developer work with the neighborhood to create a project that works for the best interests of the community.
"If he’d try to be more cooperative with the neighborhood, he’d be met with less opposition. I don’t think anybody’s trying to stop him from making a profit over here, but I think his proposed plan was unreasonable. It’s just the wrong way to do business," said John Mitchell.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!