Highland hearing goes on for ZBA
Published on September 17th, 2003
STONEHAM, MA - Citizens gathered at last Thursday night's Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting to oppose a Christopher Street condo development sent a clear message to representatives from Malden-based R. DinNano & Sons: move the process along and submit a final proposal.
Opening the ZBA meeting by formally submitting a downsized 16-unit for-sale condo proposal, the petitioner's representatives expressed a willingness to make further concessions.
"When we were last here, we originally proposed a 20-unit apartment complex. We have since met with technical review members from the town on four different occasions and a neighborhood group on two occasions. So what we have come back with today is a 16-unit project with a cul-de-sac that has a turning radius for a fire truck," explained William Adams, the development's project manager.
"We're pretty confident that the 16-unit proposal is financially feasible. The smaller it is the harder it is, but we're willing to work with the neighbors," added Russ Tanner, another development consultant.
Although neighbors seemed to welcome the complex's diminished scope, Anderson & Kreiger attorney Daniel Hill, who represents nearly 100 abutters of the proposed development, told ZBA members that it was impossible to determine the appropriate size of the project without engineered plans.
"We really can't give feedback until we have a fully engineered plan. We have a good idea and that's why we think three or four units would be economically viable," Hill commented.
"They're asking us to make a financial, economic decision for them. Have them present to you a plan with engineering. As far as I'm concerned, this is a wasted meeting," former Selectman Jack Mahoney later chimed in.
Neighbors living in the area impacted by the proposed town house development have argued since last February that the project will loom over the single family neighborhood and create problematic public safety and drainage concerns.
However, because the property owner filed for Chapter 40B protection, a designation provided to allow zoning relief to developers who construct affordable housing units, some of the town's zoning and building bylaws can be legally bypassed by the petitioner.
Despite those protections, Hill outlined several court-tested strategies for ZBA members to consider while deliberating on whether to approve the project.
Among those strategies, Hill advised the Zoning Board to carefully consider the health and public safety impacts of the project, arguing that the Christopher Street development was not consistent with the intent of affordable housing laws.
"We would submit that shoe-horning 20-units into this development is not in the spirit of Chapter 40B...Boards have the authority and the duty to put affordable housing units in the right places in town...What the board needs to think about is whether this [development] is reasonable and consistent with local needs," said Hill.
Hill further explained that the board had a right to impose conditions on the development as long as those demands did not impact the project's ability to generate a reasonable profit.
"The board only needs to grant a permit when the needs for affordable housing outweigh the town's health and safety concerns. This means the board should apply the same criteria and conditions of every project in Town. You waive regulations only when those conditions render the project uneconomically viable," Hill remarked, suggesting that board members obtain the development's proforma, or financial statement for the project.
Although Tanner didn't disagree with Hill's statements, he responded by saying that the project's aesthetics and safety concerns should be the primary concern of the ZBA.
"The attorney of Anderson & Kreiger is suggesting you should pay attention to economics first. We're saying that's not the way to conduct this hearing. The concerns should be density, drainage, etc," Tanner countered.
Hill also advised ZBA members to consider the presence of open-space, claiming that higher courts have upheld a Zoning Board's right to deny an application based on the lack of recreation areas.
Hill's open-space argument met some resistance by Hayes Engineering representative Peter Blaisdell, who suggested that the town's map showed open-space land 700 feet down the road from the development.
However, in a comical rebuttal to Blaisdell's remarks, Stoneham resident Erica Mitchell pointed out that the open-space Blaisdell referred to was the site of a swamp.
"At the end of Isabella Street there is conservation land, but it's a swamp so I don't think it's a place people want to have barbecues," Mitchell commented.
ZBA members voted unanimously to continue the hearing until November 13 so that the developer could submit preliminary engineering and blasting plans for their proposal.
The board also voted 5-0 in favor of allowing Community Planner Michael Gallerani to hire an independent engineer to review the Christopher Street plans.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!