What Can We Learn From Peabody?
What Can We Learn From Peabody?
Let’s review the past two years of activity around the development proposals for the J B Thomas Hospital land, at 15 King Street. I want to highlight this particular project because it is a perfect example of “Be Careful What You Wish For”.
King Street is a residential area, zoned R2 (1 and 2 family homes). It is off of Lowell Street in downtown Peabody, about six blocks from Peabody District Court. J B Thomas hospital, a city owned hospital, was built in 1907 and closed in the 1990’s. Until 2017, the site housed a long-term care facility. The R2 zone was established long after the hospital was built. Since 2017, the building has sat empty, targeted by vandalism.
On February 27, the Salem News published an article about a 135 unit housing proposal from Hemisphere Development, which purchased the J B Thomas Hospital property. The development proposed would be age restricted at 55+, would reuse the old hospital building and build a second building on the 3.2 acre site. There would be a mix of 1- and 2-bedroom units, with parking: 1 space for each 1-bedroom unit and 1.25 spaces for each 2-bedroom unit. This was stated to be a preliminary proposal, with room for changes.
At this public meeting, neighbors voiced concern about the proposal. They cited traffic that would come with an active 55+ community, the possibility of on street parking in the neighborhood from its residents, and the idea that this development wasn’t right for their neighborhood. They questioned the height of the building, but they were within their rights to build to the height of the hospital building, 4 stories.
On September 19 ,2018 it was reported that the plans for the development had been modified. Now the hospital building would be torn down, and the new buildings would all be just under the height of the current hospital building. Under Peabody’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, 15% of the units would be affordable.
On January 9, 2019, the developer announced that it was reducing the unit count for the project by 10%. The units would be in 3 buildings, slightly lower in height than the current 4-story hospital building. Most units would be 1-bedroom. They would seek a zoning change from R2 to R4. R4 is a mixed use zone, which would allow a convenience store and other types of stores could be included with a special permit.
On March 4, 2019, the developer made public the new plans for 120 units of 55+ age restricted condominiums. There would be a mix of studio, 1- and 2-bedroom units, 18 affordable units, and would include 60 spaces for visitor parking. The neighbors continued to protest the development as too large for the neighborhood. They also had issue with the parking plan, which included tandem parking for units. They argued that if residents needed to shuffle cars to get out, it would lead to on-street parking, which they didn’t want.
Mayor Bettencourt cautioned about shutting down this plan because the developer could redesign the whole thing using Chapter 40B. This allows developers to build affordable units by right, with little permitting from the city, if the total affordable units in the city is below 10%. Peabody is at 9.5%, or 150 units below the level.
On March 25, 2019, there was a neighborhood meeting to allow the neighbors to ask questions and voice their opinions. People at the meeting said they would be in favor of a nursing home or assisted living facility, but not this housing development. What they really wanted though was single family or two-family houses on the property. They were told that an estimated 35 single family or 18 2-family homes could be built on the land, many of which would be 3-bedroom. This would produce many more cars, and driveways on the road, adding to the neighbors’ safety concerns. The neighbors also said they feared that R4 zoning would bring in a convenience store and other small establishments along with the housing units.
Developer’s plan for 110 units.
On July 10, the developer presented plans for 110 units, and announced they would not seek a zoning change for the development. The project would include 54 1-bedroom and 56 2-bedroom units; 16 units would be affordable. This was a 27% reduction in units from the initial proposal. The neighbors still were not happy, even though this was a further decrease in the number of units, and did not seek a zoning change which would allow retail on the site.
On August 26, the Ward Councilor, Edward Charest, announced a neighborhood meeting to address concerns and educate neighbors on the proposal.
On August 30, the developer pulled the project. They stated that they were urged by Councilor Charest to withdraw the project due to the strong feelings of the neighborhood.
Developer’s latest plan for 133 units utilizing Chapter 40B.
On January 6, 2020, the developer announced a new project for the property: 133 units of rental housing under Chapter 40B, with no age restriction. They cited the city’s 5-year Housing Production Plan, which stated a city focus on rental properties to target the needs of the most vulnerable in the city. The Housing Plan also called for affordable starter homes and for downsizing.
What the city lost was 110 units of 55+ age restricted housing; 110 units that did not stress the school system; a significantly smaller number of units on the same piece of property; less impact on traffic.
Additionally, the developer has owned the land for two years after purchasing it for $1.9 Million, and has been unable to move forward. This feels like the only move left to make something of their investment, unfortunately.
Through chapter 40B, the process for permitting is more stream-lined and less stringent. The city is less able to fend off appeals. The City Council will have no say in the proposal.
Since this proposal has been filed, the Mayor and the neighbors are arguing that it places real stresses on the schools, water and sewer infrastructure, roads and sidewalks. The proposal includes three 5-story buildings, higher than the previous design. Chapter 40B allows them to bypass zoning requirements for height, parking, and density in exchange for 20-25% affordability, in this case, 34 units.
They are petitioning MassHousing to deny the project for the above reasons. It may be a long-shot though. Peabody is below the 10% affordability level, and the region needs new housing units, especially affordable units.
Why is this important, and what can we learn?
This is an excellent example of “Be Careful What You Wish For”. The developer was willing to work with the neighborhood to significantly lower the number of units. There is clearly a need for senior housing, for which the developer was willing to design. Seniors need attractive options for moving out of large family homes, not only for their safe aging, but also to make housing stock available for young families. Senior units will not add to the school population and will minimize impact on water and sewer. Seniors are also more likely to downsize to one car.
The lesson I would like to take from this is thee need to take a breath when faced with new development proposals. We need to come together as a neighborhood, listen to each other and listen to the developer. We need to work to help shape the design to achieve something acceptable.
As we look ahead to development in Ward 3 and the city, especially along Highland Avenue, we must remember that private property owners have the right to build, as long as they are building within the rules of the city. As a city we can encourage, or market to, particular types of development. But as long as developers are following the rules, they have the right to build.
I will always be listening and trying to learn as much as possible about what is being proposed and what the neighbors are saying. I encourage everyone to attend as many meetings as possible about development, to ask questions, and offer solutions. I have found that developers want to listen and want to work with us to build better projects. If you have questions, or would like more information on particular projects, let me know.
