SAUGUS — Frustrations were clearly evident in the words of residents as the Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the details of a possible new structure, including 189 rental apartment units.
Lynne Sweet of LDS Consulting Group was tasked with giving the board and residents a presentation on the building’s plans.
But as soon as the meeting started, residents questioned the presentation, with one asking why they didn’t receive a pamphlet to follow along so they could ask questions.
Chair Thomas Traverse quickly explained that this would not be the final meeting and that residents would have time to look at the documents online.
“The last time we did a 40B, and I know the developer doesn’t like to hear this, it took us 10 months,” Traverse said. “The usual time, I’m going to guess, is probably six months’ worth of meetings. So, nothing’s going to happen real fast. The town’s people are going to put in their two cents. We’re going to listen to everyone.”
Sal Palumbo, the developer of the project, said, “We put a lot of work and effort into this project, almost a year’s worth. I’ve hired some of the best people in the industry that have drawn, looked, engineered and done everything they can possibly do.”
He said that he hoped they could be welcomed into the town; he had even been a resident for the last 10 years.
“I think the project is well needed in town,” Palumbo added. “It will be great, and aside from that, I want to assure everybody here at this meeting that we will not exit or enter from Forest Street. We will only come through 861 Broadway as far as entering and exiting for this project.”
Lynne Sweet then began her presentation by explaining that with a 40B apartment, one must request a Project Eligibility Letter from MassHousing, which they submitted on June 27, 2024.
“Their job is to make seven findings, like the site being appropriate for housing, the developer is qualified to build the housing, the numbers make sense, the architecture fits in with the community,” Sweet said.
During this process, town residents were given the opportunity to comment on the project and join a site walk. The first comments were sent in at the end of August, and MassHousing issued the Project Eligibility Letter in October.
“The Project Eligibility Letter allowed the project team to file with the Zoning Board of Appeals…It was accepted by the municipality,” Sweet said.
Should the board vote to approve the project, the project team would have to go back to MassHousing for final approval and ensure they’ve complied with everything.
The team conducted testing and studies that will be analyzed by peer reviewers who are part of the town. The progress so far includes water pressure testing, parking garage repairs, replacing pumps on Route 1, preliminary sound testing, shadow studies, a traffic study and a stormwater management plan. They are discussing the gas line with Kinder Morgan and have created a lot division plan.
Sweet also discussed the need for affordable housing in Saugus.
“Today, 47% of Saugus renters are paying more than 30% of their income on costs, and 23% of that 40% are actually severely rent burdened. That means they’re paying more than 50% of their income on rental costs,” she said.
The project plans to reserve 48 units for affordable housing.
“There won’t be any distinction between the affordable and the market rate units. The properties will be owned and managed by Sal, a local company. So, if you have a problem, call Sal,” Sweet said.
There will be a lottery for the affordable units, and they expect to use a local company to organize it and draw the names.
“We are proposing 189 rental units in two buildings. They’re divided with 80 units in one building…and 109 units in the back building,” she said.
Sweet mentioned the possibility of a bus stop for school at the building, causing a resident to stand up.
“I realize you’re talking about the schools, but my concern is, can the infrastructure of the town [absorb it]?” the resident said. “That Main Street and the high school are overpacked now, and anybody that has kids in that school, there’s two ways into that high school.”
He continued that even if they work with the school committee, the only way to get to the school is to go down the pike over Main Street and spend an hour on Main Street trying to get to and from the building.
That prompted Daniel LaCivita, a traffic engineer, to explain the details of the traffic study.
“Two important things to note that were findings of the traffic study were that, based on a review of motor vehicle crash data that we pulled from available MassDOT data, no intersections close to the project site were found to have any safety deficiencies,” he said.
He continued that they were trying to keep as much traffic off of the local side streets.
“We expect the project to generate on an average weekday approximately 860 vehicle trips, and it is important to note that a vehicle trip in this context is a one-way trip,” LaCivita said. “We anticipate 72 to 74 associated with the project either leaving or arriving at the site during the peak hours.”
He added that the increase in traffic is expected to be less than 2%.
The rest of the team then presented the different studies and plans that will ongoing over the coming months.
But Selectman Michael Serino shared concerns about the height of the proposed building. “What I’m still a little leery about,” he said, ” [is] if I’m correct, you said the top of the hill is 50 feet higher than Forest Street. I don’t think enough presentation was submitted tonight.”
He specifically highlighted the discussion on the parking garage and the impact the structure will have for residents in the area.
“A six-story building, if that’s just residential without the underground parking, that’s a building over at least 70 feet,” he said. “To me, that’s going to impact the neighbors back there.”
A Forest Street resident shared Serino’s skepticism.
“When we talked about the southbound traffic, anybody who’s going to be driving north to get home knowing that they might have to loop around. Their behavior is they’re going to cut through Forest Street,” she said.
She also raised concerns that residents of the building might be able to see into her and her neighbor’s yards. She compared it to the Hilltop property.
Traverse said that was a concern that would need addressing, though he tried to assuage the resident’s feelings on the matter.
“Driving down in the fall, you see the Hilltop project,” Traverse said. “You won’t see much of this.”
But to little avail. “I’m very opposed to this development,” a Breakheart Road resident said. “Saugus does not need another housing development. I’ve been here for 40 years. I work full time, and I cannot go on Route 1 at any point in time on the weekend.”
She said that she didn’t care what the traffic study said because one can’t understand it unless one lives in Saugus.
“There’s a ton of land on Route 1,” she added. “Route 1 is a disgrace to all other towns that I have been in. Half of Route 1 is abandoned with businesses that are closed, and no one has developed them. And you’re taking an area that abuts a residential area, and it’s not going to be good for anybody.”
The Breakheart resident continued to explain that everybody would be cutting through and that she’d already seen cars going 60 miles an hour down Oaklandvale Avenue. She said that she planned to go to the police department with a petition.
Robert Long, a former selectman and a town meeting member, provided a copy of a judgment from when the Board of Selectmen was taken to court when they denied a special permit to a group trying to construct a four-story structure there.
“What is bothersome here to me is that we, the public, have not had a real chance to look at this,” Long said. “The backyards of those houses on Forest Street all abut this property…That street that bends to the left coming off of Route 1 is supposed to be a buffer zone.”
Traverse said that the council would take a look at what was presented.
“They will certainly have a roadway if this is permitted going right by their property line 24 hours a day,” Long said in reference to Forest Street. “There can be traffic, and there will be lighting and there will be noise for those folks.”
Traverse answered that, “I’m very familiar with this property. I grew up right at the end of Gilway. As a youth I was in these woods back there with this is being built…It’s a neighborhood I grew up in, and I’m not just pro-development. I care about that neighborhood.”
The board continued to answer questions specifically on traffic as residents stressed the issue of Route 1 becoming even more bogged down than it is currently. Paul Haverty, the attorney for the project, reminded the board that there were 180 days to make a decision and that if more questions needed to be answered, this conversation could be extended.
Traverse closed the meeting after two hours of discussion. But he reminded everyone that this project has not yet been approved and that more meetings were to be held for residents to share their concerns.
