PEABODY — Some residents are not on board with a proposed 220-unit apartment complex that would be built on a blighted parcel of land off of Route 1.
The development, which would be built under the state’s Chapter 40B affordable housing program, was discussed during a heavily-attended neighborhood meeting on Tuesday.
Ward 5 Councilor Joel Saslaw organized the meeting, which was attended by more than 60 residents and included a presentation by Boston-based developer Trammell Crow Residential (TCR), followed by a question-and-answer session.
Saslaw said the meeting, which was televised live on Peabody Access TV, was an ideal opportunity, not only for neighbors to share their concerns, but to help the city put its 40B issues in the rearview mirror.
“One of the other reasons we are having this meeting tonight is that we know we are close to going above the 10 percent threshold limit for 40Bs, but we will be losing some properties that presently count, which will drop off, so the percentage will go back under 10 percent when the census is calculated,” Saslaw said.
“We want to make sure to be able to put this 40B threat away for the next 10 years, but we need one, maybe two more good projects that have been fully vetted. Is this one of them? It may be or it may not be. It’s too early to tell until we know what the final project will be.”
The project, which has an estimated cost $65 million, calls for three four-story buildings to be clustered near the back of a 7.7-acre parcel with access directly from Route 1 at or near the entrance to Honey Dew Donuts.
The complex would include studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom units. Amenities would include recreation space, public workstations with Wi-Fi, outside pool and grill stations, fitness center, clubhouse lounges and meeting spaces, gaming areas and wet bars.
“We believe this is an opportunity to repair the damage and beautify the entire parcel and the project will provide much-needed housing and increase tax revenues,” said TCR Managing Director Andy Huntoon, who added that since stripping the topsoil, the property is nothing more than a “big dirt site,” which he said was a disservice to the city.
“We intend to build a lifestyle community with amenities and turn this property into something that will be enjoyed for years to come. I know people are wary because of the horrible way they have been treated, but we intend to listen to them. We understand where they are coming from.”
Saslaw said he sympathizes with the plight of neighbors, especially since the property was stripped of all vegetation 14 years ago, which resulted in the loss of a densely wooded area that served as a protective visual buffer. In addition, abutters have been victimized by stormwater surges, which some residents said have adversely affected their property use and quality of life.
Many residents expressed their concerns and, in a few cases, their opposition to the project during Tuesday’s meeting. Among the issues raised were increased traffic on Winona Street, excessive lighting at night, the location of the buildings, too much noise, and too many units.
“There will be so much light from the lights in the parking areas,” one resident said.
“I’m concerned about dropping a project like this in the middle of a single-family neighborhood as this is not a peace and quiet project,” another neighbor said.
“Why can’t the buildings be moved closer to Route 1?” asked another neighbor.
The answer to that inquiry was simple.
“We can’t, as we don’t own that property in front,” Huntoon said.
Saslaw believes there are several factors behind the neighborhood objections.
“There is a lack of trust toward elected officials, owners, boards and developers because these residents have been waiting for something to be done for nearly 15 years,” he said.
Mayor Ted Bettencourt agreed with Saslaw.
“When they came in and cleared the area (of all the trees), it was terrible and it’s been terrible for 15 years,” he said. “Many promises have been made, but none have come to light. I can say I am not in favor of the project and I am not opposed.
“I know that Trammell Crow has a good reputation. Without question, something is going to happen here and I know many of you hoped it would be 12 or 13 big, beautiful homes as had been discussed at one point. Personally, I am pleased that Trammell Crow is willing to talk and meet with us.”
Despite the opposition, Huntoon said he felt the meeting went very well.
“I think we had a very productive meeting and it was good to hear what people said,” he said. “Right now, we are working hard to come up with some better solutions based on what we heard. We’re not there yet, but we are getting there.”