Size, Scale, Parking: Neighbors Worry About Housing Project

CHATHAM – Developers seeking to build 48 rental units on the former Buckley property at 1533 Main St. presented their comprehensive permit application to the zoning board last week and heard an opening round of comments from neighbors. A common theme emerged: the project is too large and too tall, lacks parking and won’t fit in with the neighborhood. 

“This was a carefully designed project from the beginning, in collaboration with the town,” said Rio Sacchetti, senior developer with Pennrose, the company chosen to develop the three-acre town-owned site. Sacchetti said that Pennrose plans to build 48 rental units in nine structures on the land, formerly owned by the Buckley family. All of the units will be classified as affordable, with 32 to be reserved for people earning up to 60 percent of the area median income (AMI), and the remaining 16 for those earning up to 110 percent of AMI, so-called workforce housing units.

Pennrose is building a number of housing developments around the region, including two in Harwich and the former Cape Cod 5 operations building in Orleans. 

“We’re proud of the projects that we’ve built here,”Sacchetti said. Pennrose will manage the apartment complexes once they are built, with full-time staff on site to keep up with maintenance and tenant needs, ensuring that the neighborhood “remains a high quality development all through its lifespan,” he said. 

As designed, the apartments would be divided into different buildings clustered around a U-shaped access road with perpendicular parking spaces. The neighborhood would include sidewalks, street trees, raised garden beds, a small playground and an outdoor gathering area with seating for community meals, gatherings and birthday parties.

As a development under Chapter 40B, the project must obtain a single permit from the zoning board rather than undergoing review by all town and regional regulatory committees. Pennrose is seeking a host of waivers from zoning bylaws in exchange for creating affordable housing, including rules on building height and coverage, parking requirements, historical review requirements and review by the historic business district commission.

“There are provisions that no 40B can meet, and the main one is density,” said attorney Andrew Singer, representing Pennrose.

Architect Paul Attemann of Union Studio said the designs have been changed somewhat from those initially presented based on feedback from the public, adding more parking and putting smaller buildings near the residential neighbors. Some of the buildings are nearly five feet taller than allowed by zoning.

Attorney William Riley represented abutters Eastward Companies and the Leavitt family, with the latter client owning “a very nice, cute, small house that backs up to the design of a 35-foot tall building.” Riley noted that while the front of the land is zoned commercial, the back half is residential and should have lower-profile buildings that fit properly with the neighborhood. 

Ella Leavitt argued that the town’s zoning bylaw is there to ensure compatibility with neighboring properties, and the proposed buildings “will rob many of us of our privacy, both while in our homes and in our yards.” The buildings will be “looming” over existing houses, she said, arguing that Pennrose’s design represents “a formula business approach to affordable housing in Chatham.”

Representing other abutters, attorney Peter Farber suggested that the two-bedroom apartments on the third floor of certain buildings could be eliminated to allow lower roof lines.

A number of neighbors from Jessie’s Landing, the subdivision to the rear of the land, attended or wrote letters complaining about the project. Most said they favor affordable housing, but disagreed with the scale and density being proposed. Neighbor Henry Marcelle worried about the “overwhelming” size of the buildings and questioned the idea of placing them in what he called an entryway to the town. Jessie’s Landing neighbor Cynthia Fucci said she has spoken to a number of local workers whom she said would rather buy homes locally than rent them. She and others suggested that there be a mixture of rental and home ownership units in the development.

“I think that ship has sailed,” appeals board Chair Randi Potash said. Pennrose’s proposal is limited to rental units, and Pennrose has already been selected from among three companies that answered the town’s request for proposals to develop the site.

Most members of the appeals board also echoed concerns about the size and height of the proposed buildings. Member David Veach suggested that the pitch of the roof might be adjusted to lower the total height without reducing the number of units.

“It’s the style as well as the mass,” ZBA member Virginia Fenwick said. While the buildings are attractive, “I think the historic element could be a little more ‘Cape Cod’ and ‘Chatham’ style,” she said. Fenwick said she appreciated the developer’s inclusion of existing mature trees into the design.

The appeals board continued its hearing until June 5 at 2 p.m. and announced it would be having monthly meetings on the project. The board asked to receive reports from various town departments and committees offering their analysis of the project prior to June 5.