Thomas MacMillan Photo
Over the threat of a lawsuit from a neighbor, a developer’s controversial plan to build apartments at the corner of Chapel and Howe took a big step forward Tuesday as city zoners gave a final OK to a slew of variances.
By a unanimous vote Tuesday night, the Board of Zoning Appeals granted developer Randy Salvatore the legal “hardship” he requested for the project.
The vote enables him to proceed to the City Plan Commission with a site plan review for his five-story, 136-apartment, 53,000 square-foot development. And it eradicates the current public surface parking lot and stuffs 50 spots behind a street level retail and 40 or so on the concealed lot in the back.
Thomas MacMillan Photo
The BZA vote followed a contentious initial appearance before the agency in September. At that meeting, many local businesses and groups offered support for the denser, more car-less development plan. Others expressed concern for 1249 Chapel, a historic building imperiled by the project. Abutting property owner Susan Bradford and several others argued vehemently against the plan, citing concerns about noise, light, and quality of life.
A week later, the City Plan Commission approved a reduction of parking spots in the plan to 90 from a required 144. Commissioners acted in the face of opposition from several young professionals who insisted that — contrary to planners’ claims about their increasingly public-transit-oriented life styles — they indeed do have cars, they drive, and they need the spots.
Salvatore showed up last week before the Dwight Central Management Team. He offered to make minor modifications to his plan and delay next steps for two months to discuss plans further with neighbors.
Thomas MacMillan Photo
At Tuesday’s meeting Bradford, who co-owns 70 Howe that abuts the proposed site, vowed to fight the project with an appeal in Superior Court.
“They approve. I appeal. There is no hardship,” Bradford said.
Commissioner Victor Fasano disagreed.
Allan Appel Photo
BZA commissioners Pat King (chair) and Victor Fasano.
In the brief deliberations that preceded the vote, he declared the irregular parcels Salvatore has assembled comprise a hardship in their original configuration. A new BD‑1 zone created in that area aims to foster precisely the kind of denser, public transit-using mixed development that Salvatore brings to the table, Fasano argued.
His argument carried the day.
Salvatore said he was “very pleased with the decision.” He said he will continue to meet with neighbors to gather more information and to bring his site plan to City Plan commissioners to review within 45 days, likely in November.
As to Bradford’s threatened lawsuit, he said, “She has a right. We believe the ruling will stand.”
Note to editors; the BZA does not "grant hardship", they grant variances to account for hardships.
I'm not disagreeing with the intent fo this ruling, but Mr.Fasano's logic is flawed if he thinks that "the irregular parcels Salvatore has assembled comprise a hardship". Legal hardship cannot be self-created; since the irregular parcel was assembled, it falls squarely into the realm of self-creation.
Once again, variances are being used when really, new rules should be fashioned.