Prospective Totten Pond Road apartment complex proposes increasing unit count 

By ARTIE KRONENFELD

The Zoning Board of Appeals has extended its deadline to make a decision about a planned apartment building at 455 Totten Pond Road until Dec. 31.

The move came after a heated back-and-forth at its Sept. 30 meeting, where the developer’s request to add an additional 25 units got pushback from ZBA members.

The development team, a subsidiary of The Davis Companies, asked the city to approve the additional units, for a total of 340 planned apartments. They plan to build closer to Totten Pond Road to avoid moving the building closer to abutting properties.

Jim Ward, a lawyer for the planned apartment complex, said the developer has determined that the extra units would make the development more economically feasible, particularly if the city expects the developer to pay for projects to mitigate the impact of the new building.

Ward cited the city’s requirements for another planned affordable housing decision at 1362 Main St, whose developer has agreed to contribute to new city infrastructure city officials have said are necessary to support the building and its residents. 

Board member Matthew Deveaux pushed back on the idea that the project needed to add new units for economic feasibility, pointing out that the Main Street project’s developer ultimately acceded to the city’s funding requests.

Board members Deveaux and Glenna Gelineau also continued to oppose a plan to subsidize some of the project’s low-income units using HUD vouchers for formerly unhoused veterans. Participating veterans — who are moving out of supportive housing programs and now require fewer services — would pay 30% of their own income for the units, and the voucher would make up the difference up to market rent.

Ward emphasized the units’ low cost, but Deveaux and Gelineau expressed frustration that the building would still make market rent on units set aside as affordable, and Deveaux asked the developer to designate nine more affordably priced units to compensate. 

“You’re supposed to feel some pain, and the town’s supposed to feel some pain. You don’t need to make that much money off of these units,” he said.

He speculated the city might take on additional risk with these veterans as tenants. “What happens if there’s some problems with those individuals that come in because they came from a program that’s wraparound services? Now you have an increased fire, increased police presence. Because these people… they’re troubled individuals, and they’re trying to make their way back into the population.”

Joe Peznola of Hancock Associates, who has been reviewing the development of the project as the board’s consultant, said that the Chapter 40B program itself is designed to limit developers’ profit — but still encouraged the board to inform their decisions by the building’s effects on the city. He added that, in his experience, many other municipalities are not doing as much to push back on 40B developments’ future impacts..

He advised the ZBA to send the request for additional units to the traffic and civil engineers reviewing the project before proceeding.

The board agreed to meet to discuss the case again on November 18.

The Residences on Winter at 455 Totten Pond Road is one of a number of proposed large-scale residential developments in the Totten Pond Road/Winter Street neighborhood. 

The development falls under the regulations of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, which allows special permits to build residential buildings in non-residential zones if they provide sufficient affordable housing. Under Chapter 40B, the local ZBA is responsible for putting together the comprehensive special permit.

Since its proposal, the board has heard and addressed concerns from city inspectors and third-party peer reviewers about fire safety, traffic and affordability.

At the Sept. 30 meeting, the development team summarized its recent work, including new agreements to mitigate traffic issues — such as joining the local business council to supply shuttles to residents and contributing to nearby traffic projects — and continued discussions with abutters.

Other cases

The ZBA at its Sept. 30 meeting also addressed three other cases, including a decision revisiting an appeal of cease-and-desist letters from the owner of eight rental properties.

In one case, Jaclyn Davidson of 153 Circle Drive requested the board approve a first-floor extension of her private residence that would encroach further toward her rear property line than permitted by the zoning code. After her lawyer explained the slightly irregular topography of the lot and the fact that her rear abutter approved the construction, the board voted unanimously to grant the variance.

Attorney Philip McCourt also brought to the board’s attention two errors in an April case he had represented for Boston Properties Limited Partnership. In April the ZBA approved three sign variances; apparently, due to a mistype, the decisions in two of those variances didn’t match the description of the case and the signs submitted to the board. The board agreed unanimously to update the decisions to bring them into line with the descriptions they heard in April.