'Friendly' facelift planned for BRMC site
Published on April 21st, 2004
STONEHAM, MA - A variation of the popular expression that less is more, several spokespersons for the Gutierrez Company and its new partner, Simpson Housing, LP, contend that more is less.
Although a rehashed Stoneham Executive Center plan calls for constructing an additional 91,000 square feet of building space compared to its ill-fated 919,000 square foot office park counterpart, project proponents argue that the new proposal will prove far less detrimental to the Fells Reservation by eliminating previously needed traffic mitigations.
"The big change is with respect to traffic impacts. With the original plan, we had everybody leaving at 8 a.m. and overwhelming the intersections. Now we show people leaving at separate times, which would minimize the traffic impacts," explained Simpson Housing spokesperson Spencer Welton.
Taking that statement a step further, Gutierrez Company Vice-President Arthur Gutierrez, Jr., claims that all $2.4 million in traffic improvements to the Middlesex Fells Reservation Parkways would be unnecessary under the new proposal.
"We think this is going to allow us to eliminate all the traffic improvements. We're still in the preliminary analysis, but we feel comfortable saying that," said Gutierrez.
Proposing to construct seven buildings containing 600 affordable housing units that comprise a total 660,000 square feet, the revitalized project will also include 350,000 square feet of office space.
Hoping to start construction sometime within the next year, the Gutierrez Company and Simpson Housing will propose a three-tier building phase.
During the first stage, four buildings containing 300 housing units would be constructed. During the second phase, two buildings containing 150 units would be erected. And during the third phase, two buildings -- one with 150 units, and one with 100,000 square feet of office space -- would be built. According to Gutierrez, an existing hospital building would be utilized for the remaining 250,000 square feet of office space.
However, before construction can begin, the development will require approval from town officials, including the Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Board, as well permits from the state through the Massachusetts Environmental Protection Act (MEPA) process.
According to the spokesmen, unlike common affordable housing or Chapter 40B projects where builders use the state statute to circumvent local opposition to developments, the proposal will be conducted through the local initiative or friendly 40B process.
"Ultimately they'll (town officials) have to agree with everything we do...It also still needs to proceed through DCR (Department of Conservation and Recreation) and we still need to do some work with them," Gutierrez remarked.
"One of the prerequisites of a local initiative program is getting the endorsement of the town. It starts with us coming out with a conceptual plan and meeting with all the appropriate department heads and building a consensus within the town...We have reached out to the town and so far our response has been positive," added Simpson Housing spokesperson William Caulder.
Because some town officials have already expressed concerns with the potential for the rental units to drain town resources like the police, fire and school departments, the developers will hire a safety consultant to analyze those impacts.
To minimize that dependence, Simpson Housing will market the units primarily to empty-nesters and young professionals. In addition, the housing will only include 18 three-bedroom units, which normally draw families with children, according to the spokesmen.
"We're going to market it as a location separate from the rest of the town, because the site really is an island of its own. We're actually going to market it towards young professionals and empty -nesters to minimize the impacts to the schools," Caulder remarked, adding that preliminary estimates show about 58 school-aged children moving into the development.
In addition to the potential bleeding of town services, Gutierrez also added that the project won't generate the approximate $2 million in tax revenues previously cited by town officials.
"It has some advantages. But one thing it doesn't have is the same tax revenues being generated...It will generate about $1 million in net revenue, which would be after municipal impacts," said Gutierrez.
"It doesn't work as well for us either, but we're trying to be realistic in that there isn't a real market for office space right now. So it helps us and it helps Stoneham by generating tax revenue for that empty site," the Vice-President added.
While decreased tax revenues and a drain on town services are two negatives associated with the mixed-use, the project proponents listed an estimated $3.7 million economic boom in annual revenues for Stoneham businesses from the site's new residents and employees as a plus that could outweigh those losses. In addition, the residential use also brings additional environmental benefits compared to the last proposal, including the reduction of 700 surface parking spaces and more visible open-space areas.
"Within our development, we're using the ground level basement space for parking. So instead of doing a lot of surface parking, we're going to put a lot of those spots under ground for a number of reasons, including the need to keep a lot of green-space on the sites so the new residents are happy with the look," said Welton.
According to Selectman Cosmo Ciccarello, the Board of Selectmen will meet with the two companies' spokespersons on April 29 to listen to the proposal. While the meeting will not be a public hearing, Ciccarello invited interested residents to attend.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!