Published in the April 1, 2021 edition.

BY MARK SARDELLA

WAKEFIELD — The Zoning Board of Appeals will request that local public safety departments review the latest plans for a 40B affordable housing project on Crescent Street and address the safety aspects of the proposal at the ZBA’s next meeting on April 14.

The decision to call in the Fire Department and possibly the Police Department to discuss their ability to respond to emergencies in the neighborhood came after a number of neighbors and several board members raised those concerns at the public hearings on the project that have already taken place. 

Negotiations between the ZBA and the developer appeared to reach a stalemate at last week’s hearing after the developer significantly reduced the size, height and density of the project as requested by the board. But the ability of Fire and other public safety apparatus to to respond to emergencies in the neighborhood, especially on the small abutting dead end street Crescent Hill, remained a major concern for neighbors and the ZBA.

Representing the developer, Joseph Boccelli, attorney Brian McGrail noted that he and the development team had met twice with a ZBA subcommittee in a effort to get direction on the types of changes that would make the project more palatable to the ZBA.

McGrail said that the unit count had been reduced from the originally proposed 56 apartments down to 45. He said that the total number of bedrooms had been reduced even more. The number of two-bedroom units had been cut from 20 down to 10, he said.

The building itself has been reduced in size, McGrail told the board, from four stories down to three. The height of the proposed building has been reduced by 25 feet, he said.

He noted that there had been concern expressed regarding lack of parking. He said that the aforementioned changes will allow the project to meet the bylaw requirement of 70 off-street parking spaces.

McGrail asked project engineer Rick Salvo and architect Peter Sandorse to discuss the specific changes to the site and the building.

Salvo said that there will still be two levels of parking under the building. The upper level will have 27 spaces and the lower level will have 41. There are two exterior parking spaces.

Sandorse showed how the front facade had been broken into segments to reduce the appearance of mass. He said that he looked at the homes on the street and proposed a sloped Mansard roof to keep with the neighborhood look.

Sandorse also showed drawings comparing the originally proposed building and the newly revised plans.

“The magnitude of the building has changed drastically,” he said, adding the new architectural design is much more in keeping with the existing residential buildings.

ZBZ member Greg McIntosh acknowledged that a lot had been done but he remained concerned about safety, particularly the ability of fire engines to get up and down Crescent Hill, a small dead end street that abuts the site.

Board member Tom Lucey agreed that there were still too many units for the site.

ZBA chairman David Hatfield also agreed that there were too many units in a building that was too big for the location. He said that he still needed to understand the safety issues.

When the hearing was opened to public testimony, several neighbors expressed their concerns.

Tina Perrin of Crescent Hill noted that hers is a “tiny street” that fire engines already have a hard time accessing. She said that she was worried about parking and noted that overflowing trash is already a problem from the homes currently on the site.

“This is abuse of the 40B law,” she insisted.

Angelo Salomone of Crescent Street said that he wanted to see a comparison of the proposed building to the existing structures on the site.

Mark Mitchell of Crescent Hill called the project “totally inappropriate for the general residence zone.”

ZBA member Chip Tarbell advised the neighbors that a 40B project involves negotiation.

“We can’t just turn them down because we don’t like it,” he said. The developer could then go back to MassHousing, he warned, and get the OK to go ahead with the original 56-unit project.

Hatfield added that there were very few criteria that would allow the ZBA to say “no.” Safety is one of those criteria, but it would have to hold up under appeal. He said that the goal was to negotiate something that minimizes the impact on the neighborhood.

Rebecca Swett of Crescent Street said that trash and maintenance of the property are already issues. She maintained that there is an existing rat problem now.

Katherine Kulaga of Crescent Hill confirmed the existence of rats on the site. She added that she was concerned about her home being accessible by emergency vehicles. She said that she planned to move away if the project was built.

Bronwyn Della-Volpe of Cyrus Street called the project “an abuse of the 40B law.” She insisted that it did not fit in the neighborhood. “People are going to be harmed because of it,” she said.

Jerry Perrin of Crescent Hill said that the project would triple the population in a one-block area. He was also concerned with traffic and the ability of emergency vehicles to access his street. He called the project “way to much for this area.”

McGrail said that he understood and respected the neighbors’ concerns. But he took issue with the allegation the the project represented “an abuse of the 40B process.”

He pointed out that his clients had been given a site approval letter by MassHousing because there is a need for affordable housing in the area.

“The state approved 56 units,” he said, noting that the concerns have been significantly addressed by a 20 percent reduction in the unit count and a significant reduction in the height and massing of the proposed building.

“There’s not a lot of ‘give’ left,” he said. “There has been significant ‘give’ by my client. I don’t know where we go from here.”

McIntosh maintained that the development team had addressed design and the number of units but not the safety of the neighborhood.

Tarbell said that the board would need to get the Fire Department and Police involved to talk about safety.

In the end, it was agreed that the town’s public safety departments would be given updated plans and asked to review them and attend the April 14 ZBA meeting to discuss the safety aspects of the project.