SAUGUS — Thursday night, a petition for 300 rental-unit apartments was brought before the Board of Appeals for four parcels of land: 20 Rear Bennett Highway, 29 Hood St., 0 Mildred St., and 0 Goldie St., totaling approximately 7.28 acres at what used to be Weylu’s.
The apartments would fall under Chapter 40B, with plans including 25% of the units be perpetually restricted as affordable housing units at 80% AMI.
Attorney Paul Haverty of Blatman, Bobrowski, Haverty, and Silverstein LLC was there to represent the applicant.
“I did want to point out that the applicant did receive a project eligibility letter from Mass Housing, which was dated Nov. 17, 2025, which allowed the applicant to move forward and file this application with the Board,” Haverty said.
He noted that as of Oct. 6, 2025, the town’s subsidized housing inventory is at 9.54%.
The applicant’s architect, Donnie Garrity of O’Sullivan Architects, then presented the project plan.
“What we hope to demonstrate with the plans tonight (is) a large green space that is the central focus of the development,” Garrity said.
He said the big picture is to come up with a layout on the site that takes into account the scale and scope of all the parcels.
“You can tell by the addresses that there’s a lot going on up here. There are several parcels that make up the overall property. There’s a lot of papers streets… extensions from some of the local streets like Hood, that helps inform how we created and laid out both the vehicle circulation around the site and the buildings themselves,” Garrity said.
He noted that the greenspace has hardscape pathways, private pocket patios, a pool, playground space, and dog park areas.
“The angles and the layout of the buildings let us tuck this development into the hillside as best we could. It’s a challenging site with the topography… By breaking the scale of the development down into several-sized buildings, it helps us position these into the topography as best we can,” he said.
The project’s civil engineer, Peter Blaisdell of Williams and Sparages, spoke next with his overview.
Blaisdell noted that the site has no wetlands or buffer zones that would need filing with the Conservation Commission.
Board Chair Tom Traverse put into record a letter from Town Counsel John Vasapolli, in which he recommended the Board invoke Safe Harbor, which allows a municipality to temporarily deny or restrict comprehensive permit applications for affordable housing developments without facing state-level appeals.
Residents also had the opportunity to speak during the public hearing.
Resident Joanne Hastings shared her concerns about how possible blasting could affect her home.
“We live the area which is one of the oldest areas of Saugus. My house is well over 100 years old. I’m very concerned with the blasting and how that will affect my foundation and the foundations within the areas of our homes,” she said.
Traverse said the 40B is a long process and that people who live within so many feet will have surveyors before and after the blasting.
School Committee Chair Tom Whittredge, who lives on Hood Street, noted that the streets in the area clearly say “no access” and that it is stated in the covenant.
“The local boards don’t have the authority… It was signed. It’s a legal document,” he said.
Deanna Belanger, another Hood Street resident, also spoke on the concerns of blasting.
“The ledge is yards away from my home. It’s going to ruin foundations, chimneys, retaining walls, underground utilities, and the overall structural integrity of all of our homes,” she said.
Belanger continued that the existing granite ledge helps absorb vibration, reduce noise, preserve privacy, and protect the character of Hood Street, Hayden Road, Norman Road, and Anawan Avenue.
“Removing or significantly altering this ledge would permanently change the neighboring conditions and expose nearby homes to increased vibration, noise, and long-term property damage,” she said.
Many of the public asked that the property have Route 1 access only.
Denise Cheney, an Essex Street resident, also brought up the importance of the covenant.
“In a recent decision by the SJC (Supreme Judicial Court), it was decided that under a 40B application, a zoning board has no authority to modify any restrictive covenants… The courts deemed it a property right,” Cheney said.
Traverse pointed out that the applicant is only proposing pedestrian access.
After a lengthy discussion with residents, Board member Chris Riley made the motion to invoke Safe Harbor, which was given a unanimous vote of yes.
