good evening welcome to the Quincy
Planning Board's December 4th 2019
meeting and a roll call number me
present it's just a couple of comments
we're gonna follow the same procedure
that we followed the first two hearings
in in order to afford everybody an
opportunity to speak I'm gonna ask that
you keep your comments to three minutes
the hospital Hill Association is going
to have 20 minutes I would also ask that
we try to stay away from repetition on
the comments I understand everybody it's
concerned but you know repetitiveness
won't afford everybody an opportunity to
speak let me just read our Open Meeting
Law requirements but so into the Open
Meeting Law any person may make an audio
or video recording of this public
meeting and may transmit the meeting
through any medium attendees are
therefore advised that such recordings
of transmissions are being made whether
perceived or unperceived by those
present on a deemed acknowledgeable and
permissible the board requests that you
keep be courteous to the and turn off
all your cell phones and pages
applicants and project teams are
expected to dress okay you don't need
that so let me just read the notice it's
a continued public hearing
114 wit Wells Street Planning Board case
201 906 in accordance with the
provisions of chapter 48 section 11
Master General Laws in Title 17 of the
Quincy Municipal Code the Quincy
Planning Board will hold a public
hearing a continued public hearing on
Wednesday December 4th on or after 7:30
in the council city council chambers
Quincy City Hall
13:05 Hancock Street on the application
Fox Rock Whitwell Realty LLC care of FRP
Quincy Development LLC 1200 Hancock
Street Quincy mass for the site plan
review under the Quincy zoning ordinance
title 17 section nine point five point 1
which is the site plan review in the
section eight point four which is
playing unit development redevelopment
of a hospital site redevelopment hospice
late Council audit 201 seven - 1 8 9
November 20th 2019 the applicant
proposes the construction of 465
residential units on or the applicant on
or assisted living long-term care
independent living units with seven
building surface and subterranean garage
parking for 590 vehicles and related
amenities improvements on the property
at 114 Whitwell Street in terms of
procedure for truck that's going to make
a presentation then I'm going to ask our
peer reviewer to speak on the peer
review and also to have our city
engineer speak then I'm going to turn it
over to Hospital Hill Association and
let them make their presentation and
then we'll go into the public hearing
because it is a continued public hearing
okay mr. highness
that on I am the local counsel for Fox
Rock we want to thank you for the
opportunity to further present this
project for you as you all know and
nobody knows it's been a long process to
further explain how who told how the
project will be moving forward I'm gonna
do sharks climate from Fox Rock if we
could come up and he's going to address
also read a letter that's presented to
the board as well as induce the
PowerPoint good evening my name is Josh
Klieman representing Fox Rock for the
proposed project of 114 what Wall Street
this evening would like to review the
modifications that were made since the
last Planning Board hearing and to
discuss the history of this project with
the board and the community members
present tonight as Bob mentioned I'm
going to start by reading the letter we
sent to the Planning Department and the
Planning Board we would like to share
the comprehensive outreach we've had
with the neighborhood which has truly
shaped the project that is before the
Planning Board if approved this
redevelopment will address the future of
the blighted underutilized site turning
it into a first-class modern residential
campus with the support of the hospital
hill and neighborhoods association at
the city council public hearing on
December 18th 2017 we proceeded with a
clear path forward for this project
prior to that meeting we held nine
community meetings to introduce
ourselves discuss the process moving
forward share development options and
listen to the thoughts and concerns of
the neighborhood and the community at
large to date we've held 31 meetings
with the general public
the abutters and the HHA at the site and
local coffee shops at our office and at
the neighborhood Club of Quincy we've
also held several gatherings with
individuals who reside in the hospital
neighborhood we've held seven coffee
hours since the Planning Board site walk
in June which are open to the public and
organized for neighbors and residents to
come for a briefing and ask questions
these meetings were held at the newly
renovated community project room at
1,200 Hancock Street in Quincy the
coffee hours outreach included direct
mailings over 500 residents who live
within a thousand feet of the site along
with emailing our database since the
start of the project in nearly three
dozen meetings later we have made
significant changes to the project we've
outlined these changes in the attached
concern resolution matrix which includes
modification and height unit count
setbacks and other aspects of the
project based on the feedback beyond
those a line in the exhibit we have made
additional changes which we feel result
in a better project relocating the trash
and recycling facilities inside one of
our buildings on the site reduction in
height on the west side of the D
building from five stories to four
stories relocating units to the center
of the site improvements in the Glendale
Road wooded area that include enhanced
landscaping and providing upgrades to
allow the accessible use of the park our
direct outreach has been a necessary
part of our neighborhood engagement well
we've done our best to communicate
regularly and make ourselves available
to the hhn a we also felt it was
important to engage the wider
neighborhood as a whole in particular
the director butters to the site to
ensure that their views have been
represented we're extraordinary
extraordin airily proud of the current
project as importantly we greatly
appreciate the process throughout the
past three years from our initial
community meetings through the City
Council hearings planning board hearings
an extensive peer review process and
dedicated effort from the Planning
Department and the various other cities
Department this has been a comprehensive
and thorough review we've embraced this
process at every step and while have we
had and while we've had to compromise
some of our initial development goals
this is a better project as a result of
this project process to that end we'd
like to clarify a few factual
inaccuracies that were presented to
previous hearings that may unfairly
distort this project in the process
on May 22nd 2019 a slide was presented
entitled and I quote relevant zoning
ordinance ordinances that quoted from
excerpts of section nine point four
point two of the city Quincy city of
Quincy zoning code which is applicable
only to projects requiring a special
permit and not a project that is subject
only to site plan review it's been
represented this is that this project
will be the densest multifamily project
in Quincy based on a metric of unit per
units per acre this is not a relevant
metric under the zoning code however
even using this metric the project is
less dense than the average multifamily
project permitted permitted in Quincy
since 2013 and half as dense as the
average project for projects between 140
and 610 units exactly 1.1 acres of the
projects for fourteen point nine seven
acre site are located in an open space
district all of which of the remaining
area is developable and the entire sites
area is used in determining the density
floor area ratio or FA R of the project
the city of Quincy Planning Department
has conducted multiple transportation
scoping sessions March 8th 2018 and
November 15th to 2018 and has
communicated its comments and peer and
excuse me comments and responses in
writing March 21st 2018 and has also
conducted a thorough peer review of the
project transportation impacts and site
analysis based on the current project
proposal after a comprehensive peer
review process we are proud to present
the Planning Board with a project that
is entirely as a right and subject
solely to site plan review under the
applicable PD zoning the proposed
project is less than one-third of the
allowed F AR provides 65% of open space
limits building heights to only one
building that is at the zoning maximum
of six storeys greatly increases
setbacks from the original proposal and
responsibly park and responsibly
provides parking at 1.25 spaces per
dwelling unit today the vision for this
residential project has greatly improved
thanks to the feedback from neighbors
and the city and their consultants we
appreciate appreciate everyone's time
and efforts in reviewing this important
project in Quincy and we're eager to
move the project forward at the public
hearing on one
any questions from the board
this project started in late 2016
through the purchase of 114 with Wall
Street
the former Quincy Medical Center and the
simultaneous agreement with the city to
become designated developer of the Ross
parcel from the start of the project we
were tasked to provide a medical
solution for the city the agreement
allowed us to control and market both of
the downtown Medical sites in order to
attract a world-class medical provider
to the Quincy Center area while both
sites of great connectivity to the Red
Line and commuter rail the Ross parcel
received greater attention from the
medical community because of its
adjacency to the existing retail core
and the infrastructure improvements that
were already underway including
utilities and parking in early 2019 Fox
Rock made the announcement the Brigham
and Women's Hospital and South Shore
health that they would have a new home
in Quincy Center on the Ross parcel
since that announcement
South Shore Health has opened a primary
care facility of 24,000 square feet in
our building at 1495 Hancock Street and
Beth Israel has announced their own
facility one block away with a solution
for medical services being answered on
the Ross parcel that opened up the 114
Willow Street site for use with less
density and less impacts we've
endeavored to create a world-class
multifamily development that's a site in
the city deserves our proposed project
looks to unwind the years of neglect on
the site with a thoughtfully designed
master plan that provides certainty
moving forward lower buildings than the
existing buildings on the site improved
landscaping throughout the site and
improved stormwater management as part
of this world-class residential
development we have proposed this is a
unique site from a transportation
perspective the road network around the
site was designed to ferry ambulances
and patients into and out of the site
for over a hundred years with create
efficiency there's literally signage
directing you to 114 Willow Street from
miles away in every direction this is
not a site where you have to drive down
narrow residential streets to reach the
front door but both to and from the site
cars will travel on Main Road collect
streets Tarkio arterial roads and
shortly thereafter to the major freeways
of the Boston area this particular site
has excellent connectivity to both
public transportation and the major
highways because of the access along the
Wall Street we've been extremely mindful
to not allow access on to Euclid Avenue
or Colonial Drive and the portion of the
neighborhood that directly abuts Quincy
Center furthermore our transportation
study has been extremely well vetted by
beta group and Quincy ste pal Department
we've expanded upon upon the study on
two occasions at their request we've
updated modes wits provided additional
shuttle information gathered MBTA data
and further reviewed pedestrian
circulation through the transportation
study we've identified the existing
deficiencies in the transportation
network and have presented the changes
that would amount from the proposed
project we've made ourselves available
to the neighborhood and community at
large on over 30 separate occasions
doing our best to solicit feedback from
different parties at regular intervals
across this three-year timeline this has
not been a rush process you've
approached each neighborhood request
with rigor and have made compromises
countless times since the June site
walkthrough we have held seven meetings
sending out mailings to over 500 people
for the three round of meetings we've
been told by our consultants that this
is one of the most robust peer review
processes that they have ever been part
of we've gone through a series of
revisions with beta group and the city's
departmental staff we provided
supplemental information to the review
team even when we felt that what was
asked of us was going above and beyond
the requirements of site plan review one
of the key items that did come up both
in discussion discussions with neighbors
and with the city staff was a stormwater
design of the site based upon the
existing stormwater deficiencies the
design we the design we submitted would
vastly improve upon the existing
stormwater management at the site but as
the peer review process unfolded we
decided it was in the best interest of
the project to move forward with
conducting on-site test fits now versus
waiting to do that work down the road
when we were closer to starting
construction
we're committed to continue to work with
the city in beta on the stormwater
design as part of the required
stormwater permit process when it was
previously purported at a public hearing
that this would be one of the densest
densest projects ever permitted in
Quincy we were deeply concerned by this
since the project was never designed to
be greater than 40% of the maximum
allowed density so we took a deeper look
and we requested data from the city for
permitted residential projects while
data can be presented in different ways
to support a claim in our eyes the raw
data was very clear our project was not
nearly as dense as what was claimed in
the previous hearings when presented
without bias over the last seven years
for projects over 140 units which is
around the threshold for an
institutional quality asset this project
is half as dense as the average project
to be clear on this site and with this
plan our has are objective has never
been to maximize density and we remain
committed to that our current proposal
is less than 1/3 of the maximum density
allowed as measured by FA are over the
summer in conversations with neighbors
they had suggested that as perspective
older renters they would like to see
more two-bedroom units and the ratio of
parking should be consistent across the
site this led to conversations with
opera operators additional market
research and more conversations with the
targeted demographic the central
question became how do we attract and
for lack of a better term baby boomers
who are looking to downsize sell their
home but still be able to live in Quincy
as we made adjustments in direct
response to requests from our neighbors
the whole site became more attractive to
achieve our goal of creating a
multi-generational campus with the plan
modifications we made in September we
adjusted the unit mix and we decrease
the unit count by another 25 units as a
result of the unit mix shift as part of
the submission we also increased
building setbacks and lower building
heights at the periphery of the site
or with over the course of the project
we've reduced the unit count by over 22%
which is a significant compromise we've
reduced the height in size of the
buildings where the tallest proposed
building on the site is nearly 20 feet
lower than the existing buildings we've
landed at a density less than 1/3 of the
allowed density site entrances were
shifted in additional garage entrances
were eliminated at the request of
neighbors we've also greatly increased
building setbacks this is going to be a
transformational project for the
blighted site the neighborhood and the
city the project will connect connect
the Whitwell neighborhood down through
the Glendale neighborhood with direct
access to Glendale Park the eyesore of
the current buildings will will be
removed and lush dense landscaping will
further reinforce the perimeter of the
site it's going to be a place for
projects residents and neighbors alike
to walk their dogs sip their coffee and
take evening strolls this is going to be
a great project with great new residents
both from outside and within Quincy that
will improve the quality of life for all
parties we had a great movie night in
Glendale Park this past summer and we
look forward to hosting more events like
that both in Glendale Park and in the
new courtyard this is a project that
promotes people not cars thank you for
listening we look forward to advancing
this project tonight and we have our
design team here at address any
questions you may have
ok
okay thank you okay now ask a
representative from Vedic who was our PR
consultant to come up and make a
presentation good evening my name is
Jeff Macke students from the beta group
a project manager for the peer review
beta was the lead peer reviewer for site
civil transportation utilities
stormwater in landscape architecture on
the project beta will continue to work
with the city on additional review as
required and advise on stormwater design
in watershed modeling we'll talk a
little bit more about this in a minute
we also will assist the city and
permitting and on-site construction
monitoring and oversight over the course
of the project we have completed several
rounds of review and comment with the
project's engineer which is tetra Tech
at this point there are no significant
issues except for the stormwater issue
which my colleague will speak to in a
few minutes but there are no significant
issues that haven't been answered by the
applicants engineer I will summarize
transportation recommendations followed
by stormwater Phil parodist my colleague
and Scott Ritter on land landscape
architecture will follow that for
off-site off-site improvements for
transportation your recommended
providing a new traffic signal at the
intersection of Whitwell Street and Adam
Street geometric changes at the
intersection of Whitwell and granite to
improve pedestrian safety improvements
on several roadways and intersections in
the area improvements would include
sidewalks pedestrian ramps crosswalks
and pedestrian signals to improve a.da
accessibility and safety these
improvements would be funded by the
applicant but completed by the city's
DPW department also a new MBTA bus
shelter on the north side of Wall Street
is recommended as part of the prod
we're on site improvements we
recommended a free shuttle bus from the
site to the Quincy sender MBTA station
which the applicant has committed to we
recommended the applicant reconstruct
sidewalks and fronting the project on
wit Wall Street and include curb
extensions provide safety for
pedestrians and as a traffic calming
measure prior to occupancy the applicant
would need to file a construction
management plan with the city to reduce
impacts on the neighborhood the parking
management plan and a shuttle bus system
operating plan with the city we
recommended several travel demand
management techniques in addition to the
shuttle bus system this would be a full
time on-site transportation coordinator
complimentary one month MBTA pass to all
new tenants at the site and biennial
traffic and parking monitoring report
filed with the city for their review as
I said the applicant has answered all
our significant issues at this point I'd
like to ask Phil Paradis to come up and
speak about the storm water issues and
drainage on the site good evening my
name is Phil Paradis I'm a professional
engineer a LEED accredited professional
I've been asked to do the site civil and
stormwater review of this project as my
colleague mentioned many of the issues
related to the site design and layout as
well as lighting and other features
associated with the project the
applicant has addressed those the one
outstanding issue is one related to
stormwater management and this is a
challenging issue because the applicant
and in their effort to meet the
stormwater management standards they
have done a number of different things
to
reduce stormwater runoff and treat
stormwater runoff on-site they actually
reduced the amount of impervious area
from a point six reducing it an acre
almost an acre and a half on within the
site they also had proposed 12
infiltration systems throughout the site
which would have infiltrated two and a
half inches of runoff across the site so
even with that however because of the
the the age of this system and the the
age of the infrastructure in both
Whitwell Street and Glendale Road and
Euclid as well these systems are
significantly under sized for today's
standards and as you may know runoff
events are becoming higher and higher
and issues related to stormwater runoff
are becoming more in the forefront so we
asked the applicant to provide some
calculations relative to the what this
connect could they're connecting their
runoff to the street which does happen
now but is exceeded even under the
smallest events and so we asked the
applicant to provide as as was mentioned
provides some test pits to make sure
that their infiltration was going to
actually happen
however there's this the whole site that
looks like it's a glacial tale with a
significant amount of fines and with
very very little infiltration so we've
been working with coming up with a
solution through the engineers office to
to kind of mitigate this this is at the
top of the hill so obviously they don't
feel the flooding
everything runs off and goes downhill
but obviously this this has the
potential to impact the lower reaches of
of the watershed and we thought this
would be this has to be rectified in
some manner so I think the process that
we've kind of worked out is that we
would ask the applicant to provide some
management of the stormwater runoff such
that they don't exceed the ten year
storm event off the site your
subdivision regulations require twenty
five years but again there are meeting
they're meeting the standard by reducing
the runoff on-site so so it's kind of a
mix the I'm sure Paul will attest to his
idea was that this watershed should be
evaluated to find out how the
infrastructure and or how the stormwater
can be managed on this site to work in
conjunction with maybe some capital
projects that would provide stormwater
management improvements so that we would
so that we wouldn't we would reduce the
frequency of flooding the residents down
down gradient so I want to stress that
this project will not increase runoff
from the site however the current
increase from this site the current
runoff from the site exceeds and
probably many of the butters can attest
to she run off over Overland flow down
the streets or Overland flow across
properties it currently does that so so
that's that's where where I stand right
now we are we think that the this can
the the both the development of a model
stomata model so that we can test
different options to to control runoff
and the conclusion of the design is the
site design on this on the site can be
done probably under the stormwater
permit process in the city so like I
said the the applicant has provided
significant improvements they attempted
to provide low-impact development
techniques and good management practices
the soils on the site do not allow that
to be realized and so there's got to be
some more working of the final solution
I don't know any questions before we go
to Scott or go ahead mr. go water
it's mr. next esses yeah I'm looking at
page 28 of your November report of ember
26 at the bottom this deals with the you
click F extension and um there was a
concern about a fire v Fire Department
vehicles accessing the building D
especially the the backend the Glendale
Road end of building D because you
really can't get at it
from coming in from Whitwell so I'm
looking at a plan and I don't see on the
plan how a fire apparatus would get up
there the plan to me doesn't show of an
emergency access did you see one that
showed emergency access we've raised the
issue and made that that issue with the
fire department yeah and you indicate
that it it's the issue is resolved
the it says the applicant has extended
the Euclid Avenue Stuber Road for fire
truck act
this but I don't see it on my plan
unless I'm misreading it does mr.
Kleinman have an answer to that I'm
looking at c6 so part of the oath first
of all throughout the throughout the
process we did engage the fire
department to have them look at the
plans and so part of the code
requirement for at fire department
access is off the top of my head but I
believe it's two hundred and fifty feet
from the truck to all points of the
building with the revised design we
added the lot that is on the east side
of the D building as well as we
increased the stub into the site from
Euclid Avenue which then satisfies all
of the requirements for fire department
access for the project I'm looking at
plan c6 correct is that the extension
that is shown may it all that is needed
to meet the requirements for the fire
department that's all and then they have
to come up through the landscaped area
correct there's a hydrant there and they
would tap into the hydrant and then the
hose would be then brought up to the
project from that site and in the site
the project does meet all of the fire
department requirements
and the chief okay all right thank you
good evening my name is Scott Ritter a
landscape architect from the beta group
working on the peer review with the on
this project and we came up with a
pretty thorough review a lot of comments
that were mainly focused on the abutters
and the abutting streets making sure
that the screening and that landscaping
was adequate we we went back and forth
with the developers team and we added
plant material we added solid fencing
around in certain areas so we got a lot
accomplished there all the technical
issues on the landscape point of view we
have resolved all those issues with the
consultant and I think we're good on all
those issues the only thing I'd like to
say that I think we'd like to certainly
be on-site during construction so that
there's certain areas that need
additional plant material or fencing
that we're out there observing that
while that's being planted and while
that's being the work is being done so
with that I think we're done
good evening I'm
sell the city engineer it's a pleasure
to be here tonight I'm joined by my
colleague Jen Zhang who just stepped out
and both Chen and aiya Pease
Professional Engineers and we've been
involved extensively I review on this
project essentially redoing the peer
reviewers and I just want to talk
briefly about the existing site proposed
and their more regional issues the
existing site has a as the neighbors can
attest a significant amount of
uncontrolled runoff when it rains
there's a lot of water that ends up in
the neighborhood
existing sites about 15 acres but 8.6
acres is impervious so about seventy six
percent of the site once the water hits
it it's gonna want to leave the site is
little or no infiltration so the water
has no place to go but essentially in
the neighborhood of the proposed site
has six point eight acres of impervious
surface that's about 54 percent so
there's a significant amount of
impervious surface so that in and of
itself will help you know prevent water
from getting into the neighborhood the
developer submitted a report on May 7th
and as a result of our review of that
report we requested additional test pits
be done to see how much what type of
soil you have and it's a very tight
glacial till so we really push to have
at least two and a half inches of
storage on-site so the first to win two
and a half inches of rain will
essentially be stored and underground
chambers that nobody will see that's a
significant improvement right there as
well the new MS for stormwater permit
were under requires a one inch storage
in the developer we'll be doing about
two and a half inches so once after two
and a half inches the chambers will
overflow into the piping system and the
water will flow off site but once it
hits 4.7 inches of rain it won't go off
site it'll continue to be stored on site
so anything over 4.7 inches a ten year
storm the neighbors won't feel so a
significant
out of this is that the existing
drainage system off the site is is old
and it's outdated we have the same
problem throughout the city this those
areas are called sub-watersheds so on
the water drains into it the water goes
down onto Glendale and eventually find
this way to the furnace Brook and then
satin century to the coast so it's a
it's a citywide issue we're working with
the DPW and several consultants it's
about 220 sub-watersheds in the city and
it's a big task for anyone consultant do
quickly so we've taken the opportunity
to look at those pieces of the
sub-watershed across the city as a
jigsaw puzzle and we're looking at
different pieces across the city out of
how's next for the seawall project we're
doing a hydraulic analysis of all those
sub-watersheds we just finished it on
Town Brook we're doing it in furnace Ave
and the furnace brook watershed so we
see an opportunity with this project to
look at four sub-watersheds around the
the old hospital area that sub-watershed
to give you an idea adds up to about two
hundred and twelve acres so we're
recommending that we take the
opportunity to have the developer
working with beta do a hydraulic
analysis of those 212 acres I want to
reiterate that lowering the impervious
area by essentially 1 1/2 acres
infiltrating two and a half inches those
actions right there meet the local state
and federal requirements so the request
for additional modeling of those 200
acres is above and beyond what we would
require but we recommend it for this
area given the history so the city has
developed a citywide capital improvement
plan for drainage and the Glendale area
has been flagged as an area that needs
analysis and some potential mitigations
so I think we can kill two birds with
one stone
would benefit the site knowing that
runoff off site can be handled it would
benefit the 200 acres and the neighbors
that live in that area then would also
help us with our citywide plan yeah
anybody have any board member self
questions now okay okay I'd like to ask
our city engineer to come up I'm sorry
say something so I know who the
characters up now now that I'm out of
the planning department okay I'm gonna
go to the neighbor okay why don't we
just turn it over to the Neighborhood
Association
mr. Smith good evening members of the
Planning Board my name is Will Smith I
live a 15 Glendale Road I'm here tonight
speaking as a chairperson of the 114
with Wall Street site committee for the
hospital Hill neighborhoods Association
h hn a HH n a represents the collective
opinions of over 120 families in the
neighborhood surrounding this property
recently we offered 125 lawn signs that
said save our neighborhoods from over
development to any interested neighbors
the response was overwhelming over 30%
of these signs have been placed on the
front lawns of hospital Hill residents
who are not members of H hna but are
concerned about the scale and the
density of this project there have been
many requests from other Quincy
residents outside of HHM a but we were
unable to meet that need I present this
information to you as an indication of
not only the neighborhood opposition to
of this project but also from the
community at large we would like to
thank you the Planning Board for
allowing us to express our thoughts
about the intrusiveness of this project
in the neighborhoods of hospital Hill
our attempts to have any type of
meaningful conversation with Fox Rock
about the scale and density of this
project has been rebuffed in every
occasion our only option is to speak
directly to you about our concerns we
trust that you have and will continue to
listen and then make the appropriate
decision for one of the vibrant
neighborhoods of Quincy in our
presentations of May 22nd and July 17th
we believe we have sufficiently
documented our concerns about this
proposed developments and the negative
impact it will have on our neighborhoods
we don't think it's necessary
to take up more of your time by
repeating ourselves however we have
given you a package of information
summarizing our previous presentations
outline outlining the neighborhood
concerns so let's talk about the latest
revision to this project in front of you
today fox rock has reduced the number of
units from 490 to 465 although it's a
trivial amount it looks like a move in
the direction that the neighborhood has
been clamouring about for the past year
a reduction of units should lead to a
decrease in the number of people a
decrease in the number of cars and a
decrease in the size of the buildings
but wait upon further inspection of
these plans just the opposite has
occurred the square footage of these
buildings have increased by over 20,000
the number of bedrooms has increased yet
the plans say that the number of
residents will decrease and so will the
number of parking spaces I would like to
find any developer in the city of Quincy
who would agree that an increase in
bedrooms would actually decrease the
number of residents in their development
additionally in a response to beta the
fury viewer concerning the decrease in
dwelling units and an increase in
bedrooms Fox rocks representative tetra
Tech states and I quote the unit mix was
adjusted as a result of additional
conversations with the community you
really have to be kidding me here after
hours and hours of public hearings and
countless letters to the Planning Board
in opposition to the size and scale of
the project
Fox Rock has the audacity to say that
the community wants a larger development
so let's just call out what this is Fox
Rock has listened to the neighborhood
concerns completely ignored them and
gone in the opposite direction the
financial model is easy to understand
the more residents you
can fit in a development the more
revenues and profits you can generate in
closing my remarks I would like to
emphasize that hhn a is not opposed to
the redevelopment of this site we
believe that it is in the best interests
of the neighborhood in the city to get
this done this proposal is overwhelming
for a residential a and B neighborhood
we believe that a first-class
development of approximately 350 units
and a bedroom count of less than 500 is
appropriate for this location our next
speakers will provide more specific
information on why and how this project
should be denied on behalf of HHM a and
our community I thank you for listening
my name is Ted moolah rain president of
hae na
I live at 101 Monroe Road as will
mentioned we have covered a lot of
ground in our previous presentations to
this board especially regarding the size
of the proposal in relation to the
surrounding neighborhoods all those
points still stand and H HMA stands by
the accuracy of what we've presented to
this board Bacharach seems to have taken
exception to some of our analysis
unfortunately HHA has not been given the
opportunity to review these concerns in
contrast we are happy to provide all
disappointing data and analysis to this
board or to every request it and it
should be noted that Foxx Rock has never
made this request we've delved into some
of the technical aspects of this
application some addressing the peer
review some not yet the scale this
development is our primary concern I was
very surprised they see that Josh did
not provide an overview of their
September 5th updated proposal in a
depth tonight so let's get into it
as we'll mention this was headlined by a
reduction in 2011 25 units between the
May 7th and September 5th proposals when
you dig in you see that this is actually
not advantageous to the neighborhood
note the increase in bedroom count from
618 to 632 this is largely due to a
significant increase in the number of
two-bedroom units an additional 82
compared to the previous proposal as
well mention the building area has
increased over 20,000 square feet or
about 4 percent in the previous proposal
90 units were designated age-restricted
55 and over no more this increases the
proportion of school-aged children and
increases the number of peak hour
commuters and conveniently a reduction
in the unit count allows a developer to
decrease the number of parking spaces
now we come to an important point
estimated population foxtrot claims that
despite increasing the number of
bedrooms the number of rez
will decrease this defies common sense
this estimate comes from their fiscal
impact analysis and is based on an
average of one point nine eight persons
per unit derived from unspecified census
data whether it's a studio or
three-bedroom unit one point nine eight
persons are occupying it clearly this is
a flawed approach as an aside the
project narrative reference ins is an
updated version of this fiscal impact
analysis which I confirmed that it has
not been provided the Planning
Department this factors into the
incomplete nature of this developer's
application the correct analysis would
be to use data from the latest version
of the US Census American Housing Survey
for the Boston MSA this provides a
number of renter occupied units cross
tabulated by the number of occupants and
bedrooms this gives you the average
number of persons per unit type applied
to the respective unit mixes you get a
thousand thirteen residents for the
original proposal and eleven hundred
residents for the updated proposal this
is an increase of 87 the bottom line is
this proposal has grown larger by every
other metric aside from the unit count
this in no way speaks to our
neighborhood concern is the absolute
fallacy that this revision benefits the
neighborhood one other aspect of this
proposed I'd like to bring your
attention to comes from response in the
peer-reviewed documents
Fox Rock States the applicant has
negotiated lump sum mitigation payment
to the mayor's office for any and all
site any and all off-site improvements
the city should bear the responsibility
for the design and construction of all
off-site improvements it's interesting
that no mention of this negotiated
mitigation payment was made this evening
it's also interesting that this
negotiate this was negotiate with the
mayor's office not with us board not
with the plaintiff department on what
basis this amount was determined has not
been disclosed one of the roles for this
board is to stipulate conditions that
developer must meet as part of the
approval process it seems in this case
the developer has also put a ceiling on
their obligation and by our estimation
it is inadequate by the way that that's
been determined as a 1 million dollars
the negotiated amount
so consider Avalon on quarry Street when
the approved in 2014 approximately
850,000 mitigation adjusted for
inflation was stipulated for off-site
improvements which amounted to mostly
adjusting timing of existing traffic
signals additional signage and striping
in one case the addition of a turn lane
signal compared that to signalizing the
intersection of Weldon Adams from
scratch
adding traffic calming bump-outs to a
Wall Street and configuring the turn
lanes at whittlin granite those three
items alone which have been identified
by the applicant or the peer reviewer
would presumably exceed the amount of
this payment leaving the taxpayer for
the remainder and I'm not even sure
where the stormwater runoff that we just
heard about fits in to the off-site
mitigation to conclude I like to
highlight one last item at the last
hearing in July councilor Yang asked Fox
Rock to demonstrate why this project was
so much larger than comparable
developments and why it was supposedly
not feasible at a smaller scale in
response Chris real was quoted in the
Patriot Ledger is planning to show a
cost analysis at the next planning board
meeting I'd like to note that that
analysis was not provided tonight thank
you
even mr. chairman members of the board
my name is Robert Quinn I decided at
twenty Dixwell Avenue I've been a
resident of this city for the past 41
years you've heard opposition to this
program over the last two public
hearings and you will hear additional
opposition this evening what I would
like to do is take that opposition and
turn it into what you have to do which
is review this under the site plan
approval ordinance of the city of Quincy
in particular the site plan approval has
some six criteria that are referenced
are eight criteria and I'd like to point
your attention to two of them that are
applicable to this application item six
in your criteria it says that the
application must minimize unreasonable
departures from the character materials
and scale of buildings in the vicinity
this application turns that requirement
on its head this application takes in an
apartment complex the size of the
elevated apartments at the intersection
of Route three and 93 and places it in
the middle of a residential neighborhood
it is not minimizing the departure from
the character materials of the of the
scale of the scale of the buildings in
the vicinity secondly item eight-inch
requires that the Planning Board and in
through the site plan approval ensure
the compliance with the provision of the
zoning ordinance this application we
don't expect the Planning Board
certainly to be the zoning enforcement
agent for the city of Quincy but I
believe that the role of this Planning
Board must be more than just simply
looking at the table that shows up on
the front page of their plans and
looking at the numbers and checking off
the boxes for parking spaces in FA our
and apartment numbers and in particular
I call your attention to three sections
of our zoning code that should be
enforced in by this Planning Board and
would be grounds for denial of this
application first of all the PUD
criteria the PUD criteria that has been
established it still applies to this
program even though it's through an
amended PUD requires that the proposed
location and arrangement of structures
shall not be determined detrimental to
existing or prospective adjacent land
uses are to existing or prospective
development of the neighborhood that's
the PUD requirement
you have heard overwhelming evidence
from the from the neighbors that this
development will in fact be detrimental
to them and I would ask you to deny this
application for that reason alone the
height of the buildings is is is
detrimental the privacy of the media
butters will be impacted the shadows of
additional shadows of the large bulk
area that this that these will that this
project will construct will have a
direct impact on the neighbors on
Colonial Drive as well as those on
Rosslyn and Euclid Euclid streets I'd
like to also call your attention the
failure that our applicant to seek a
special permit and that has been
referenced by the applicant in the in
their presentation they claim that they
are not in that is not necessary I would
call your attention to the call your
attention first to the fact that the
statute under which the zoning code
operates chapter 40 a in section 9
allows for PUD development and that's
the authorization that the city has to
create a PUD zone that section that
section 9 requires that the that the
that the the city would be the grant
special permission for anything within a
PUD zone so I think the application for
a P for a special permit is necessary
and the review that a special permit
would allow for that this board would be
that allowed should be applied to this
application here before us today
so under section 9 of the of the chapter
the special permission is required even
though the applicant says that the local
ordinance is not required also the
failure to comply with the affordable
housing requirement the affordable
housing decline of the night and frankly
I've worked in my career in many
different ways but one of the world more
than 10 years I worked in managing
affordable housing programs in this city
as well as through the Boston area and
the applicant has absolutely no plan
that they've submitted to this board
that shows that their compliance with
the with the Quincy affordable housing
program 10% of the units should be set
aside for that they're not sending
inside any of the units these are all
market radar units they must have site
any funds for the for the failure to
provide those units they simply say that
they're going to work with the
affordable housing trust committee to do
that I don't think that's appropriate at
this point at this juncture for this
application in this project which has
been going on now for five years
according to the developer to now come
in front of this board and not have an
affordable housing program in place
governor Baker was here two weeks ago
and he spoke about the need for
affordable housing throughout the
Greater Boston area this program too
provides none and I would suggest for
that reason and that reason alone you
can deny this application finally the
Planning Board II in last year we
established regulations with respect to
the traffic study in response to and in
light of the overwhelming the problems
with respect to traffic in this city and
across the Greater Boston area though
this board required that projects of
this size complete a full Basti ot study
under under do TT ia guidelines they
have not done this in particular they've
never put together a scoping letter with
the city of Quincy that would give
transparency to what they're actually
looking at and what they're going
forward instead what they rely upon it's
a conversation with the city and a
meeting that was held in February of
2000 in 2018 almost two years ago that's
and if it was a scoping letter it would
include not only the growth that is
required that will be shown by at one
percent per year as they show in their
study but it would also take them to
effect the fact that this that the
studied intersections those along Bergen
Parkway those on Grant Street the two on
both of those two locations are going to
be impacted by developments and in the
adjacent properties most especially by
the development by Fox Rock at the Ross
lot with a medical office building Beth
Israel Deaconess is moving in a convert
on hand and Parkway the two large
developments in the Downtown Hancock
parking lot as in a 700 carga Raj all
those going to impact the traffic on at
those four intersections most especially
and yet there's no note taking into
account that additional growth and that
would have been required if the scoping
letter was was properly done and was
updated accordingly for those reasons
this board has the right and in fact I
would suggest to you the duty to denied
this application and I ask you to do
that thank you very much
is that the presentation let's just okay
all right before I go open it up just a
couple additional comments first of all
as I could thank the Association keeping
to its minimum time thank you very much
yeah you still got to know you want to
yield your time now forget I read the
open Open Meeting Law your client was I
just want to read the Planning
Department abstract that the Planning
Board's general rules the Planning Board
reserves the right to administer both
summon witnesses call for the production
of papers cross-examine any person
giving testimony during the proceedings
declare recess limit debate inspect the
site which we've done or buildings
during reasonable hours and adjourn the
hearing for cause the auto of business
will be announced by the chair and I
think I already did that all questions
will be directed to the chair any person
wishing to speak may raise his or her
hand for recognition from the chair when
recognized please stand state your name
and address specific interests in the
proceedings and special credentials what
I'm going to ask under in this room is
that you line up down the back and then
we'll move forward please speak slowly
and within the context of the hearing
matter I'm gonna as I said I'm gonna
limit it to three minutes and we we did
fairly well the second time I understand
people want to get their comments in and
they're taking the time to be here so
but I understand we're trying to give
everybody an opportunity mr. Stevens
we'll keep track of the of the time okay
I'll open it up since it is a continued
public hearing I don't know if any of
the city councilors want to speak if you
do come on up
councillor DiBona yes I'm always first
mr. chairman board members just thank
you for the opportunity my name is Noel
deponent city councillor at large some
of the biggest things that I've that
we've been working on over this last two
years is seeing the units go from 598 5
490 and now to 465 one of the biggest
striking things that I saw with the
decrease of 25 units over this last one
was the take away of the 55 plus 90
units for the seniors and the over 55
community some of the biggest issues
that I get across the city of Quincy is
senior citizen housing and seniors
buildings and over 55 communities it's a
constant need throughout the city of
Quincy
so without the affordable housing being
involved in this project I thought it
was really nice that the over 55
I had a requirement of 90 units and I
know a lot of them like colleagues will
talk about other points but as far as
the density as far as the units I think
the density is still very high I know
this is a negotiation process we've gone
through this a few times if I was
sitting in my seat by the way I didn't
vote for the PUD vote because I wanted
to be able to negotiate the process from
my City Council seat and the biggest
thing I would have strike tonight was I
need to make an amendment and make a
motion to add amendment of the 90 units
over 55 requirement age requirement and
I would put that into motion and go
around the table I'm asking if that
could be a condition a requirement an
amendment to that to add that 90 units
back into the motion into the into the
record because I feel that that is a
strong need in the city of Quincy I go
to other senior citizen housing and
that's the first thing they say I have a
friend or relative that can't get into
these buildings or they want to sell
their house and they want to downsize
but they want to stay in the city of
Quincy so I hope all you would take that
into consideration tonight
and in the near future thank you for
your time thank you counselor
Council of failing High Council elect
but thankfully a guy could she gave you
she allowed me to come up first
I'm before you this is actually the
third time and I'm gonna speak as I
spoke all those other times and won't go
into all the details that we spoke about
the last time because you've all had
them this has been a long a long hearing
I think everyone in the neighborhood
realizes that something is going to be
built there and I think we all realize
that and that's in the position of the
Hospital Association's they also agree
something's going to be built there I am
in complete agreement with the the the
Neighborhood Association I feel that
this development is very dense it
doesn't fit in the key with the
character of residents a and residents B
which is all around it I realized that
something's going to go there but I I
feel even the drop really put in it it
adds more people it adds it adds a lot
of people to a very congested area I
realized that some some people said well
the hospital was there well the hospital
was there and there was oh there was a
lot of movement and and out and all that
but you were also going to be putting a
lot of people there and I feel that in
people gonna be living there there's
gonna be additional traffic there's
gonna be things that weren't there with
the hospital so I am I am in complete
support of the presentation that was put
put together by the Neighborhood
Association I would ask the Planning
Board that I realized something is gonna
go here a couple of things I would ask
is that conditions any conditions that
are applied I know there are certain
conditions that are always put on any
development that goes in you worrying
about like dust control when the when
there was demolition of the buildings
also to the point where rodent control
different issues that can impact the
neighborhood I was glad to see the peer
review come in and really take a look at
the drainage and really put a lot
because as a council back in the in the
late eighties I remember
several incidents that happen with it
with the city hospital where a fuel tank
let go there was several flooding as
flooding as several the neighbors out
there and I think anything that goes in
there
those flooding issues those issues of
drainage off the site those issues of
sewerage and different things that are
going to come with anything that goes in
this site I think is very critical that
whatever is done that that is part of
the permit that those conditions are
added in and that keep that that fox
rock is really kept their feet to the
fire on these issues and I think those
are important I know generally what we
do when we do a site plan review there
was an order of conditions that come
down and I would hope that the same
would be put on be put on put onto Fox
Rock but I do I do
reiterate that I am in complete support
in the neighborhood associations
presentations I think this is too dense
for the neighborhood and I would speak
in opposition to this project Thank You
mr. chairman Thank You counselor
that's a liang good evening chairman
Meade and members of the Planning Board
I'm here tonight to start by saying for
the last three years we reviewed this
project has looked at what type of
tell'em I was going to go here who the
development will serve the parking
issues height requirements density
requirements congestion concerns public
safety concerns and frankly the number
of units are going in here once we knew
that a hospital was not a viable option
it was never a question of if but how we
were going to proceed with this project
I said it before and I'll say it again
tonight this project is a relationship
of three parties the city the residents
and the developer we all have to work
together to have final goal of a project
for you know a replacement of a
dilapidated building my concern is that
we've always come from a place of
collaborative efforts and respect
something that I hold hosts personally
and professionally
neither was demonstrated by the
developer the reduction of units is a
slap in the face because reduction of
units had an increase of numbers of
bedrooms this was undercutting he was
disrespectful he was personally
insulting and I'm incredibly
disappointed by this move
for those of you who have been here when
I've been able to speak in front of you
I thank you for your time
and I know that those of you who I've
worked with know that I always come from
a place again of respect collaborative
efforts finding ways to move forward
agreeing to disagree and ultimately
understanding that we all want the best
for the city and for this neighborhood I
personally cannot stress how much I am
deeply insulted and disappointed this is
the second time I think I've ever stood
up publicly to say that this has
happened because I try my hardest to
give everyone the benefit of the doubt
frankly I don't know how we as a city
and how we as a community can move
forward but obviously re-establishing
any amount of trust for this project or
any projects in the future with this
developer I seriously ask that not only
do you consider the arguments that were
made here this evening with respect to
the specifics on the project but take
very seriously the insult to injury and
frankly the complete lack of respect
that has happened here thank you for
your time
good evening a Mahoney counselor at
large but more importantly I'm a
resident a resident that is seeing this
happened throughout our city this isn't
the first time I'm standing before you
and when Fox Rock came before us with
the LDA I said no when the pud happened
three years ago it was a mistake because
it took what we needed to make sure
stayed as an opportunity for us to
protect a neighborhood and now it's in
your hands tonight when we stand here
before you to tell us that the special
permit no longer existed it just goes
with the ordinances another slap in the
face because when the PUD got pushed
over to be in the Planning Board there
was never an attention that it wouldn't
be a special permit that only only it
would be taken out of the City Council's
hands and put into your hands and that
it would be the benefit of the community
so that it would be because it was going
to be a collaborative effort I have
never seen anything like this there was
no collaboration to hit B at the last
meeting and to watch Fox Rock leave when
people got up to speak the very people
who they should be listening to they
left they didn't bother to listen and
then to come back with this kind of
proposal where it's in in your peer
review where it says the current
proposal projected 25 fewer dwelling
units but 14 more bedrooms compared the
previous proposed project therefore in
effect the size of the current
development impacts have not
significantly changed it basically your
peer review is telling you that they are
playing a shell game
to add insult to injury to find out that
private conversations and negotiations
are happening on a public with public
monies basically saying that the mayor
has negotiated for what we would
basically say the applicant the
applicant has negotiated a lump sum
mitigation payment through the mayor's
office privately not publicly not
publicly noted until it was brought
forward and found in these notes and
asked to be find out that that was a
million dollars for offices the office
in any off-site improvements the city
shall bear the responsibility for the
design and the construction of any
off-site improvement the city peer
reviewer accepted this response I'm
asking you not to accept that response
because like everything in the city what
that turns around and says is the city
will bear the responsibility it's not
the city it's not the administration's
off it's it's the taxpayers of the city
of
that was here and they can no longer the
residents of the city of Quincy can no
longer be the backing of the developers
when they are going to make millions of
dollars off of our residents and ruining
our neighborhoods and that is what is
the most disturbing thing is that
they're standing up here saying that
they had open hours coffee hours that
asked them how many people went if they
sent out to 500 because they weren't
listening finally when you actually have
I'm so tired of this and I know you know
this I'm very I'm gonna be apologetic
cuz it's never it's not really your
fault but it's truly it's truly painful
when I go to planning board meetings
when Iced here zero impact your traffic
and to find out tonight that they did
not have a scoping letter and that they
are and it was not tied this is the
other thing that brought parking lot and
Hospital Hill magically are not tied
together in an Lda but yet here we stand
tonight and we're not tying there down
the street from each other they're
having a traffic study telling you what
they need and that they need the city to
pay for it but we're not actually doing
a scoping letter to actually see what
the impact is going to be in the
surrounding area that's going to be
multi million dollars it will be paying
for isn't it and enough that we're
paying for the Ross down the street to
actually clear everything for them isn't
that enough
at the end of the day we know something
we'll go there and I don't think that
this neighborhood or any neighborhood is
here to fight with you and say that we
don't want something it's that we want
something that we both can live with
that we both can be proud of and I think
those things can happen and that's the
middleman that you are that you have to
find a way to be able to make those
things work but we need developers that
are honest that are going to stand
together with us and work with us and
when they're not and adding insult to
injury to come back and play a game with
us to put less parking to put more units
and to suggest that they're answering
the questions of the neighborhood that
is insulting and it's insulting to all
of you and to your intelligence please
please do not let them make a fool of
all of you please stand with the
residents of the city Quincy stand with
the taxpayers and let this be something
that we can put a message back and bring
something that's going to actually make
sense for this neighborhood
thank you very much
mr. president Thank You mr. Meade mr.
chairman members of the board for the
racket brac roll city council president
92 Weiden Road which would tell you that
you know I don't directly live in in the
area but I'm here tonight speaking and
standing in solidarity with my fellow
city councillors as well as a hospital
held Neighborhood Association outside of
being up you know City Council that's
been up here for a little while I'm also
a you know general interested party in
the city and I've always looked at it
from the perspective of you know if you
want to hear what's going on in the
neighborhood talk to the people that
live there and I could tell you from
last hearing until now I kind of follow
the project more through the through the
broadsheets than anything but you know
this is a this is a well-oiled machine
that basically put together
presentations based on facts what I've
heard consistently from you know from
the citizenry is that then you heard of
here tonight and I'm sure you'll
continue to hear is that there's an
understanding that there will be
development that takes place there my
own personal opinion and this is just
John Q citizen is that the plan is
presented is is rather dense for the
neighborhood I do like what council
found was was alluding to and it's
certainly an avenue that I pursue as a
city council when it comes to larger
projects in my district but looking at
terms and conditions because we can have
the best engineered plans the best
traffic study and I do agree with
council Mahoney's sentiment as it
pertains to traffic studies but to some
extent when you're dealing with larger
scale projects the reality doesn't set
in until it's built until it's occupied
and then you know sometimes we recognize
some unintended consequences so as you
contemplate this and I know many of you
personally that you do you do diligence
and you care about the community as well
I would strongly encourage you to
consider the density may be a project
that at a smaller scale but even more so
maybe a look-back provision so when this
thing is fully up
and occupied maybe there's a condition
in the permit that says hey let's let's
have a traffic study and see what the
actual reality is there potentially this
further mitigation talks at that point I
don't know just the suggestion as I
always try to come to the microphone
with was idea so again I stand in in
solidarity with both my council
colleagues in the hospital Hill
Neighborhood Association and you know I
trust your judgment when it comes to
these projects so thank you for the
service to the community
okay so as I represented anyone wishes
to speak to line up come up to the
center aisle I would ask to try it at
all possibility to avoid repetition but
you know you're here and I know you want
to speak so come up I ask as you
identify yourself because it is being
recorded good evening my name is Carolyn
long and I lived 85 Colonial Drive I've
been here before I've spoken to you on
each of your meetings so I understand
the need to not be repetitive and I'm
going to try not to several of the
speakers before may have done my job for
me because one of the first topics I
wanted to speak on was density of course
I'm one of the closest abutters
if not the closest to butter to the
particular site so I feel that puts me
in a unique perspective to be able to
comment on the project as a whole first
of all I'd like to voice my support for
the position of the Neighborhood
Association and thank them for doing
such a great job and pointing out the
ramifications of density true.you the
developer has asked for a great number
of units in the project and I felt from
the beginning that the number was too
great and I think that if they presented
the number that they have now to you at
the first meeting you still might have
thought that it was too great I know
that I would have fistula I believe that
the new residents the number of
residents that the hhn a has presented
to you in actually an 11 acre site is
outrageous and would result in many many
issues for the community and certainly
for the abutters at lodge but I want to
speak specifically to I certainly agree
with all the topics that have been
presented today but I would like to
speak personally from my particular
vantage point of the project I also want
to say regarding density the developers
said that they increased the number of
bedrooms etc based on communication from
the neighborhood nobody ever asked me
units I've never spoken about additional
units at all I never would have agreed
to that for sure
I did ask originally to the developer to
when it came to building setbacks I
asked them for greatest setbacks behind
our properties on Colonial Drive they
did do that to a small degree but
instead what they've provided us with is
a street a street which I believe it's
going to be two lanes with parking on
either side 43 cars parked behind my
house a number of cars packed behind
other houses on Colonial Drive and I
feel that this has been a callous
disregard for the existing neighborhood
which will have very little impact on
their own residence at all so what
they're doing is they're providing a
much greater Pleasant area for their own
residents and with very little
consideration for us at all I'm going to
have noise it's pollution from the
exhaust I'm going to have delivery
drivers going back and forth right
behind my house I trying to think of
properties in the city where somebody
has that running directly behind their
back yard and I'm at a bit of a loss but
anyway that's what I really wanted to
speak to you I feel like they're
misrepresenting themselves by saying
that the neighbors said that they wanted
greater bedroom units and when we asked
for greatest setbacks we received a
Street and that's certainly not at all
what I was interested in having in
conclusion I have to say that I've not
met with one individual in the city the
things that this project is a good idea
they think it's outsized and outrageous
that it's even being considered to be
built
I believe the developer has a misguided
idea of what the neighborhood is looking
for and that they they seem to
legitimately feel that this project will
be beneficial to the neighborhood and I
don't see the one instance where that
would be the case so I ended my very
first presentation to folks before by
saying that I believe that any project
that's built on the hill and I think
there should be something up there it is
getting blighted I think it's probably
bladed it because Fox Rock Catherine
come up with a good idea yet and it's
just getting more and more blighted as
time goes on but I entered my first
presentation by saying that I believe
that the project on the top of the hill
should be the jewel in the crown
Hospital Hill and this project certainly
does not achieve that and I'm sure that
somebody else could do that thank you
for your time hello joseline said me I
live at the 85 Munroe Road here in
Quincy in December of 2017 the Planning
Board accepted the request from the City
Council that it the Planning Board act
as the quote permit granting Authority
end quote on any applications filed as
to 114 Whitwell Street I objected to the
amendment in December of 2017 because
any applications would be reviewed by a
board made up of appointees of the mayor
an unabashed supporter of Fox rocks in
all of its endeavors rather than a body
duly elected by the citizens of Quincy I
have to say that I apologized in part
for that because I have been very
impressed with the attentiveness of
every member of the Planning Board
throughout multiple presentations
multiple citizen comments you've been
tremendous and I appreciate that I also
appreciate the input from our city
councillors and I want to note in
particular that I have gone to just
about every Fox Rock meeting that I've
been invited to or that's been held
since this property was purchased by Fox
Rock and there have been a lot of them
and Nina Liang has been at many of those
meetings starting from the very very
beginning when we're talking about an
assisted-living project up there and I
want to thank her also for her extended
and and a continuing support of the
neighborhood club under the zoning
ordinance for site plan approval the
board has discretion to impose
conditions that are reasonable you have
been presented with data that indicates
that this is one of the densest
residential PUD s in Quincy and that'd
warps other apartment developments not
in the downtown area it's also in the
middle of neighborhood a neighborhood of
single-family in two and three family
homes it is within the purview of this
board to reject the application and/or
to impose a condition that limits the
number
units and/or bedrooms so as to reduce
the overall impact of this project on
the surrounding community such a
condition would not be arbitrary and
capricious but rather would be well
supported by the evidence of the need to
do so in most recent filings with the
Planning Department
there are several issues that are not
addressed with respect to zoning issues
that need to be and I'm going to go
through some of these some of these have
been addressed before so I'm not going
to spend a lot of time on them before we
were told by Fox Rock that they
estimated that a third of their
population would walk to public
transportation or take their van or a
bus and another third of the population
would travel by car to work in and out
of the facility we never heard what the
other 400 or so residents
we're going to do and when I talk about
400 residents I want to go back to one
of the conversations that I had early on
actually you're not early on more
recently with Josh Kleinman of Fox Rock
when we were talking about the
population of the the units of the the
the project and Josh's point was they
don't want to see this project
overpopulated either it would make it
more difficult for them in a number of
different ways he said that the way they
were going to control for this was to
require in the lease that there only be
two people occupying each bedroom well
if you take the number of bedrooms that
they now are going to have and multiply
that times two you get to a population
of twelve hundred and sixty-four people
and we so we're looking to find out what
happens to the other 400 people at this
unit I would say for the peer review
that all of that all of the figures in
terms of trips in and out especially
during a peak times have to be
reevaluated with the 50/50 split 50
people driving 50 people taking public
transportation and addition additionally
and I have much more to say but
obviously I don't have time to say it
with respect to the million dollars
we're not talking just about the
improvements to Whitwell that have been
identified previously but we're talking
about all of the improvements that were
recommended by the peer reviewer for
pedestrians and pedestrians
and in their in their report the peer
review indicates I think it's on page 12
that there were lack of walkways lack of
signals and this is around the four
different intersections lack of warning
panels lack of countdown pedestrian
signals lack of ApS buttons inadequate
time limits for signals lack of
pedestrian ramps overrun vegetation
missing signs missing wheelchair ramps
that million dollars that's supposed to
pay for all of these things plus the
signal plus the bump outs plus
everything else it's never gonna pay for
all of that and weed the citizens of
Quincy we are going to underwrite this
project so that this major corporation
under the under the umbrella of a bob of
mr. hale and and Brannick communications
can make millions of dollars we're gonna
underwrite all of those improvements and
I forgot to mention installing sidewalks
all along Euclid Avenue if any of you
went to this site and actually exited
the site along Euclid Avenue which is
where we're told all these people are
gonna walk you'll discover it there are
not sidewalks on both sides of that
Street that's also gonna come out of our
million dollars around the million
dollars they're gonna pay and out of our
pockets so in conclusion I guess I'll
submit something further in writing to
the to the board I do appreciate again
all of your attention to all of our
presentations and all of the citizen
comments I really do appreciate it it's
a it's really been affirming to us in
terms of the people in this city who
volunteered their time to spend it in
ways like this thank you
I'm Anthony Monaco Tony 1 Glendale Road
I'm here to speak tonight against the
proposed development currently before
you we hear in the media of the need for
more housing but the more specific need
is for more affordable housing this is
not what this development is about and
should not be confused with the urgency
for affordable housing this project is
for upscale apartments which are not in
short supply now I have no objection to
a first-class housing project in the
neighborhood just not of such a scale
and magnitude that it overshadows its
residential neighbors the development of
this size is better suited for the
development zones in the city
specifically focused on high-density
growth not in historic neighborhoods we
hear of the need to amend zoning laws to
make it easier for developers to create
housing there is no evidence that there
have been undue restrictions on this
developer particularly since they had a
hand in rewriting the PUD rules for this
property rather the sticking point is
that they got too greedy by trying to
over develop the site without taking
responsibility for its impact on its
neighbors and failed to take the
opportunity to design a reasonably sized
neighborhood friendly development that
would have sufficed for them and been
welcomed by the community as has been
shown by the empirical data presented in
earlier meetings by the HHA the current
proposed development would be among the
densest residential developments of the
city using the measure of units per acre
by the way right in the middle of
residential neighborhoods this is not
suitable for its location and should be
scaled down significantly to make it and
the adjacent neighborhoods more
representative of the Quincy we all want
to live in a request to reject the
proposal in its current format in
opposed suitable conditions that would
bring it in line with rational and
reasonable development thank you
hi my name is uh Paul Chandler I live at
160 Whitwell and my concern is the
administration building the one that was
built in 35 or 36 with the columns I've
saw some projections and it looks like
Fox Rock is incorporating them to
building into their plans but I'm not
sure if it's guaranteed if if that's
ensured that they're going to preserve
that building and when I looked up
whether it had been evaluated for
aesthetic or historical value
I did find a PDF online I think it was
on Fox Rock site where the Quincy
Historical Commission nominated the
building to for the National Register of
Historic Places this was back in 1986
though so I'm wondering if there's been
a new evaluation since then if you know
which agency does that which agency has
Authority maybe there's overlapping
authority between the Planning Board the
Massachusetts Historical Commission the
Quincy Historical Commission the
National Register of Historic Places and
the whatever deliberations there have
been whatever the criteria are wondering
are they are is that publicly accessible
can we see the records the transcripts
of the conversations and I think you
know I think would be a terrible mistake
to take the building down personally but
I'm interested in knowing what steps
have been taking and what steps still
need to be taken if any thank you thank
you
good evening my name is Linda Monaco and
I live at 21 Glendale Road but to begin
I'd like to thank all of you for serving
on this important board on this board
you provide a very valuable service to
the city and the citizens of the of
Quincy
thank you all over many many months
you've heard from people on both sides
of this development I believe there's
one group you've not heard from and I'd
like to remind you of their existence
today and in the future that group is
our children grandchildren and the
generations that will follow them what
happens on the top of Hospital Hill will
be our legacy to them what has been
proposed by the developer if approved
will be the worst of legacies to leave
our families of the future when you
allow a developer to fill the hill with
the densest development in the city you
will be leaving our grandchildren a
blight on this residential neighborhood
which exists in the shadow of historic
homes when you allow a developer to fill
the hill with high-end market rate
apartments which I don't believe the
baby boomers will be able to afford
you'll be leaving our grandchildren with
the legacy of a transient population a
transient population who won't stay long
in Quincy and won't feel the same
commitment to a community that a
homeowner does when you allow a
developer to fill the hill with an
endless stream of traffic you will be
leaving future generations
with the legacy of a congested air
polluted neighborhood when you allow a
developer to fill the hill with a
shameful example of how we put the greed
of the developer ahead of our
grandchildren's right to live in a
neighborhood they can be proud of you
will be making a huge mistake when you
allow a developer to fill the hill with
this proposed development I believe you
will be making an enormous mistake which
will affect generations to come as this
proposal before you goes forward I would
like you to be mindful of the enormous
responsibility you have in making
certain we are leaving our future
generations a legacy of which we will be
to say we approved I'm against this
proposed development and I strongly
encouraged the developer to go back to
the drawing board and plan a development
he would love to live near thank you
thank you good evening mr. chairman
members of the board my name is Ernest
Trevino I live at 61 Colonial Drive
there are three points I'd like to make
my biggest concern is the number of
occupants on the hill greater than a
thousand persons will be living there
this doesn't include the visitors that
will be going there the delivery trucks
that will be going there and others
plate people that will be visiting the
site with these thousand occupants
another major concern is the waste
management first I want to acknowledge
I'm very grateful to Fox Rock for moving
their storage facility away from
Colonial Drive to the center of their
development in speaking with them the
concerns that arrived after that point
was that they're planning on having
daily pickups around the facility and
then bringing it to this storage plant
they then planned to have this waste of
organic and inorganic stored there for a
10 to 14 day period it's electronically
monitored and then the waste management
company will come out I'm concerned that
this might lead to a breeding ground for
rodents so that's a concern I have I
think it'd be nicer in mitigation if
they were to take it off-site each day
if they're gonna pick it up.once take it
right to the dump the other major
concern I have is the impact of traffic
and everybody has spoken of this but
we're not alone
the Boston Globe does spotlight review
on November 19th 2019 we run for a full
week it acknowledged that the Greater
Boston metro area is really in trouble
the current metro Boston region has over
three hundred thousand more cars and
trucks on the road than it did five
years ago and they're coming from both
the south north and west this adversely
impacts emergency vehicles school buses
delivery vans and all persons needing to
be somewhere in a timely manner even
buses run into this problem
the average bus during Russia averages
about eight
miles per hour I commute to the Longwood
Medical Center each day ten miles one
hour and that's a good day the red line
has also suffered some adverse results
forty derailments in the past five years
more than any other metro transit city
system in the nation yet this is where a
fair number of the people will be going
people need to be able to get to their
jobs pick up their children get to
medical appointments and back home to
places where they can afford to live and
do this in a timely manner
I also want to quote what was in the
spotlight report of how two point six
million commuters in the Greater Boston
area are moving about
they found that 66% commute in cars
alone so they go bad with a number of
people that we have public transit
cebause nth carpools are about 7%
walking about six working from home
about 6% and bicycles about 1% with that
being said a thousand occupants on that
hill is really going to impact our roads
the conduits that lead to the expressway
that supposedly makes it convenient for
these people who'll be moving into these
apartments the conduits that are going
to get there are going to be backing up
right to our front door and we wanted to
be able to get out of our driveway so I
please like you to emphasize the
importance of decrease the number of
occupants on that hill thank you for
your time and for your service thank you
hi my name is Valerie Joe already Stuart
and I live on common Street
I apologize I'm not prepared I'm kind of
going ahead live right now this is my
first meeting I just bought a home in
Quincy three years ago so I'm just
getting interested into the development
of the city I've lived here my entire
life I grew up in Quincy Point living on
common street now I'm not part of the
neighborhood but I'm still affected
because you know this development it's
it at quick glance it looks like the
kids a zone to go to Bernays ani one of
my concerns is you know we have these
these big projects going up how are the
schools going to accommodate these
children I have two young babies at home
I have another one on the way and it's
so overwhelming to think that you know
we might not get the resources or the
attention that we need because the
schools are going to be filling up you
know I was really surprised to hear that
the presentation kind of sold it as
though it was you know a certain number
of residents but then the neighborhood
association points it out that it's
actually even way more people so the
fact that that it just seems like
certain things aren't aren't really on
you know very transparent or we just not
get and maybe like the bottom line is is
a concern as well I wish I had some
points written down because you know the
other concerns everyone's talking about
traffic
I Drive both my kids to daycare one's in
house not yeah the smallest and you know
coming out of Koree street I have to
cross over to Furnace Brook I have to
cross Adams Street I don't need any more
traffic lights or across walks or
anything like that I just need a little
less people on the road so if we're
gonna be having what is it maybe 1200 or
something proposed more people you know
just it's a big impact it's overwhelming
it's really stressful just to get around
the city the other thing is we're
talking about what there's a million
dollars in the budget or something to
cover XY and Z and
if you know anything any monies go over
that the taxpayers are responsible I
mean that's me it's just a little it's
not fair because my taxes already went
up I live in a modest home what am I
paying for because I'm not seeing any
incentives so I guess the future you
know the future planning whether this
project goes goes through or they need
to revise the details you know I just
hope that you keep people like myself in
mind who are directly impacted by a lot
of the negatives I'm not seeing a lot of
positives and you know it is something
to consider and I hope for the next
meeting I will have some better speaking
points but thank you for your time
how you doing good evening everybody
John Rother Phil 8 Jackson Street and
Taunton kind of representing my dad at
62 grand wall Road want to thank
everyone on the Planning Board for
serving it's a very tough job serving I
also want to you know throw a shout out
to member berri member kellyann remember
cami so past members I was going over
all the planning decisions that have
been made over the last 10 years
analyzing what the zoning or the
planning have made and these are hard
facts this is the reality of Quincy that
we live in I'm downstairs taping a
conservation meeting so for the last
four years I personally myself have been
at every planning meeting and I've
personally been at every zoning mini
meeting so I have been a a witness in
person for the last four years and then
I like I said I've gone to the Registry
of Deeds if anybody wants to do it go to
the Registry of Deeds
to Quincy city of and search for
decisions and you will find every
decision that the city of Quincy has
every done because when a decision is
made it has to be recorded at the
Registry of Deeds and until that
decision is recorded then that decision
doesn't take effect but once that
decision is recorded that decision
becomes the law so these are the 10
biggest projects with my contacts I
might look better but I can't read so I
got to put on some reading glasses
they're the 10 biggest projects over the
last six years that have been approved
198 Hancock Street that's the North
Point the MBTA project that's third
300,000 square feet six hundred in ten
units 497 square feet per dwelling unit
so as I go off this list it goes square
feet units dwelling units Quarry Hills
that's a PUD they're taking a while to
develop that one two hundred and sixty
seven units thirteen hundred and
thirty-seven
squares feet per dwelling unit 550
victory road that's actually Muriel that
only has 742 square feet per dwelling
unit 600 Crown Colony 492 units that one
has 907 square feet per dwelling unit
but much of those square feet are on
cliffs and mountains not very usable
that one even though it's the biggest
kind of just makes the numbers look
better for the hospital Hill Association
the next one is 1414 42 Hancock Street
that's what's the chestnut that's under
the you RDP that's 169 units at 373
square feet per dwelling unit Nova 1500
Hancock Street
that's 171 units at 369 square feet per
dwelling unit one chestnut street I know
I'm not sure that's anywhere near three
minutes but my point is it is drunk the
whole lot of them okay the number of the
top ten comes to 910 square feet per
dwelling unit where this one 465 units
has 1400 square feet per dwelling unit
the city of Cambridge when we're talking
about the Association talked about per
acre we're talking about 31 12 units per
acre as the hospital hill Association
this board over the last five years has
done a ratio of 47 properties per acre
the city of Cambridge allows a hundred
and forty five properties per acre they
allow eighty seven properties per acre
when you look at their whole zoning
chart the minimum one is 29 per acre so
this is not dense compared to the city
of Cambridge it's not dense to the City
of Boston it's not dense to what we're
doing in the city of Quincy what it is
dense to the people who live up in the
hospital Hill Association they feel this
is very dense to them because this is
hitting them but this has been hitting
people all over the city
Decco we're getting seventy million
dollars worth of tax revenue we're
getting fifty million dollars from West
Chestnut that
hundred and twenty million dollars the
Galvan project of the 58 units that he
made we're getting 24 million dollars of
tax revenue from those properties so
taxes went up on Monday by two hundred
and seventy-eight dollars I think and
they were trying to figure out how do we
shift it from the businesses to the
people well this is the way that we
shifted and we saved the people this is
the new growth we've already spent the
money people okay and unless we grow
someone has to pay for this this is one
of the best projects I have ever seen
and if you compare Fox Rock to the other
developers that have developed in Quincy
they are top notch they're gonna build
beautiful buildings they're gonna pay
full taxes and then no one's talking
about the affordable housing that's
going to come as a result of this down
on the Ross parking garage so there is
going to be an affordable thing when you
cut this project from 600 to 450 what
you really did is you took away 15
affordable housing units from people
that really needed them so what we
really need is we need to work together
as a city and we need to instead of
squeeze in 50 units on spare Street and
50 units on Beale Street we need to put
them where they belong
this is where a nice apartment
development belongs in you know I fully
support this project and I hope you vote
on this and approve this tonight so we
can just move on and stop building
much-needed housing which is needed
thank you very much before this
gentleman speaks can I just remind
everybody if there's someone in the
audience doesn't want to speak but wants
to be recorded there are signature
sheets over on the windowsills so feel
free sir I'm sorry my name is Rohit
Poddar I live at 152 Whitwell Street
that was an interesting person before me
that's as I as my company works in a lot
of those buildings I would be Emily
disagree with pretty much everything you
said we've actually made a lot of money
actually in those buildings from for me
poor management poor setup so first
thing I wanted to say and I've said this
before
Fox Rock says as a developer people come
from say property development they're
not part of them is someone who develops
property they have not they've done one
property ten years ago they are not a
property development company their
management company Equity Residential
builds property
Avalon Bay builds property grace Weston
if you build properties that's their
markets box Austin is not in this
they're one of these this is their first
project they don't do residential they
don't have any residential portfolios
they've never run residential this is a
guinea-pig project for that so separate
from the end results we're talking with
the construction of this project they
don't have the contractors know people
lined up they're gonna be hiring people
and if you may remember that they talk
about they've had this development in
all these discussions for so many years
in blah blah they fired their entire
team outside they're amazing people what
a year ago because they failed again
they don't know what they're doing so
that's the first part of it um internal
communication just this is on a personal
note I guess for Mike knew your spawn
truck we've gotten very few letters on
Fox Ark most of our notifications come
from a chase and egg which shouldn't be
their response way but they do it should
come from Fox Rock but we had virtually
nothing from them the only two really
should have gone from them was one when
they were gonna put up a six seven story
building whatever it was 25 feet away
from my house and I just put up solar
panels and they said and I said silicon
it's gonna affect it based on the actual
math and science from the company they
install the solar panels I got a letter
from Fox were saying no no they won't
just trust us okay
oh that's I I don't know I I believe in
math and science so I don't know that's
just a weird way to phrase it to me on
the trust factor and then if they say
just trust us well their very first
meeting they ever had with the community
they were adamant they were not two
apartment complexes an apartment complex
on Hospital Hill very first meeting
right out of the gate we're not doing
that
so that's the level of trust oh and my
most recent one was a couple days ago
apparently my house is built fifty
hundred years or whatever the case was
apparently they're saying my driveway
again just this is just how petty this
is my driveway might be encroaching on
their land so they're going to file
litigation against me in that matter so
we're talking about how many units here
we're talking with massive development
they've owned the part for years the
driver has been there for again I don't
know how long so I assume there's some
sort of grandfather in there and they're
sending me letters saying that a couple
days ago that's potentially encroaching
on their property and they're going to
want to file litigation to get that
that's the neighbors we're dealing with
so yes I I'll take their trust with a
grain of salt good evening my name is
Regina Scanlon and I have lived at
fifteen Glendale Road for 36 years and
in Quincy for 55 years first thank you
to all of you on this planning board for
your time and your service to Quincy the
quote goes that people do not like
change I do not believe that personally
I believe in and am all in favor of
large developments in down town and I
applaud the current administration for
the rebuilding of Quincy Center what I
think is that people do not like
unreasonable change and I think that the
Fox Rock plan for 114 Whitwell Street is
an unreasonable proposal I am solidly
against this current proposal it is by
two large and looming over a
neighborhood it was a day not long ago
when Quincy residents would meet and
chat and often discuss the weather now
what is discussed is traffic traffic
traffic and what times of day it is best
Brava we're right the fox rock proposal
currently shows 632 bedrooms this brings
the possibility of well over 600 cars or
if we are to determine that everyone in
those bedrooms does not use a car we
might assume there are many children yet
we have been told that the number of
children will not affect the local
schools which are bursting really it has
to be one or the other
the current Fox Rock proposal should be
of concern to all residents of the city
of Quincy as if this passes it will set
a precedent and will be a very strong
message from the city to its citizens
that over development in neighborhoods
will be allowed and this will continue
until neighborhoods as we now know them
are gone in Quincy I quote the esteemed
mr. Rogers from the PBS television
program mr. Rogers neighborhood he
quotes our neighborhood communities our
hallowed ground please I asked you to
stop the overdevelopment of our hallowed
grounds now do not allow Fox Rock or any
developer to overwhelm ours or any other
Quincy neighborhood with a project of
this magnitude thank you thank you
I um my name is Colleen stop and I live
at 11 dicks well Avenue and my husband
and I moved here five years ago because
it was adorable it was cute
seemed up-and-coming the neighborhood
itself is a gem I don't know if you've
all been there but there's every house
is different and large and gorgeous and
it just it makes you full of admiration
for a town that used to be if you put
this or if you allow this to happen
you're going to shrimp Quincy of what's
special about Quincy and specifically
about this neighborhood and I just beg
you not to allow that to happen it just
seems like such a wrong place for a huge
apartment complex and if you think about
what some in between this apartment
complex and here where there's tea sorry
the tea and restaurants it's our
neighborhood those are those people
those renters are gonna walk through our
neighborhood constantly walk their dogs
have their dogs poop on our yards
constantly it's just not fair to us and
if we had known that this was gonna
happen when we bought our house five
years ago we would have bought something
in Cambridge or in Somerville because
that's what it's gonna be so if you
allow this you're really changing the
face of Quincy and I just want that to
really impact you and for you to really
think about that and in closing I would
just like to say I am so proud of my
association and a lot of familiar faces
here from my neighborhood and I'm just
so proud of you guys for coming with
such a fact-based argument and I just
don't see how this could be allowed
after hearing what they've proposed
about how the costs are going to fall on
us and about how this is so inaccurate
and how things have been so shady
so please please I beg you not to allow
this to happen
Jeff Hinz 197 Elm Street
I represent the Quincy Center
Neighborhood Association and we'd like
to fully support our friends at the
hospital Hill neighborhood association
you talk about traffic what are they
gonna bring it back the four of a
whistle that trip you know five minutes
before you know you put your feet around
the point you don't go out because
there's gonna be traffic during rush
hour it's kind of that's what's gonna
happen in this neighborhood so one of
the it's a whistle gonna go off here in
City Hall what a warning to our friends
at Hospital Hill neighborhood
association be careful that this does
not get snuck in we had a situation
recently in our neighborhood where we've
been fighting a project for a couple
years and due to a lack of quorum no
through no one's fault they were given
the project by right so be careful that
this does not happen to you thank you
Anthony Larusso to Euclid have I've
spoken with you before and I've had a
lot of different issues raised but I
just like to say again I'm one of the
more impacted folks by both flooding and
by future pedestrians and I do allow you
to thank you very much for letting me
yeah speak again but I do agree with h
hn a and i'm the city councillors and
all the different views that you've
heard from a lot of different folks and
I really you know I'm really thankful
that folks would come in and speak but
on my particular issues right so let's
talk flooding for a second I had spoken
with the folks at a fox watt tetra Tech
we actually get to walk on the site look
at where I am see how the water would
come down a lot of water comes down I
get flooded the house gets flooded a few
times it gets inside the house you know
backs up in the in the sewer system and
after speaking with tetra Tech they had
assured me the world's gonna be grateful
for you have this project is over
you're not gonna any more flooding and I
was pretty excited by that I'm like
that's great you know but I didn't I was
kind of alarmed I hadn't heard the
presentation I was given earlier today
which causes me some pause and some
concern that maybe that might not be the
case so I would ask that for folks like
me you might consider adding a condition
or an amendment or something that since
this is going to be handled after its
permitted that's what I think that's
what I heard they're gonna just modeling
they're doing some other things I've
seen them digging but that they might
consider putting something in there that
would allow you to some recourse if in
fact it doesn't get better because the
condition as is even if they just meet
what they're doing now you know it for
me it's it's it's it's not really that
great so I think that that's uh that's
important another one is the pedestrian
situation again most of them gonna walk
right past me right I'm the first house
right there right and if we don't
adequate I brought this up before if we
not the adequate fun
to fix that area up and put in the right
walkways and whatnot that would be an
issue so we really want to make sure we
that's part of the plan it should be
part of the plan should be planned for
if we can do that ahead of time I think
that would be really important and the
last thing is on and I do I apologize
cuz you guys this is not really for you
guys in a way but by deferring to the
Planning Board the special permitting
Authority we really felt that in fact
that was going to happen right we wanted
the city councillors to have their voice
and have it be heard and have it have
weight and and they spoke and it does
have weight but they don't have voting
weight right and by not having this go
through a special permit now this it
feels a little bit like a betrayal of
that process and I apologize to use
Network so strong but that is that is
sorta how it feels
thank you thank you
anyone else wishing to speak and again
ever in mind anybody that you know you
don't want to speak a little shy the
sheets for the for your position are
over on the windowsill second time
anybody else wishing to speak third no
one okay I'm gonna ask mr. Stephens go
ahead mr. Kelvin
who's the public hearing can we just do
one thing I just want to enter into the
record the correspondence that the
levant received Thank You mr. chairman
through you to the board the planning
department as we've done in the past
we're not going to read every letter
individually we're going to characterize
the letters that the department did
receive you have copies of the full
letters in your planning board packets
we have groups of letters for folks in
favor of the project in groups of
letters in from folks in opposition on
the memo that you received we have
listed in favor of the project letters
received from Thomas D Robinson
real estate developer submitted at on
November 27th 2019 we received a letter
in favor from a Rakhi Chan of 72
Marlborough Street received on November
27th
David Zhu of 41 Grogan Ave received on
November 27th in favor Lilly Chu of 25
Goffman Street received on November 27th
Henry Chu of 25 Gotham Street received
on November 27th Loraine see from 20
Madison Ave received on November 27th
David Howe received from 20 Ellington
Road in favor received on November 27th
wah Quon - of
ten wilson ave received on november 27th
again all these in favor
Kawai hard shoe of also 210 wilson ave
received on november 27th in favor
janice zhou of 82 Rodman Street received
on November 27th wing say of 61 a Water
Street received on November 27th gooo
you along of 82 Rodman Street received
on November 27th in Fernet a president
of Boston Cannons of Major League
Lacrosse I received on November 26th a
Sherri L Deline executive director of 50
stars non-profit serving low-income
families received on October 28th Carey
grippy of 36
Alvin Ave received on October 22nd Terry
mag already owner director of NSYNC
Center of the Arts received on October
21st all again all of these in favor
mark Jarvis a realtor Quincy resident on
September 20th Kimberly Robinson of
Hancock Street received on September
18th
Devin Leahy a commuter new-new Quincy
resident received on September 17th
Noreen F know full last name 1022
Hancock Street received on September in
September of 2019 and Diane Ward of
Quincy medical employee received on
September 15th so those were all letters
received in favor of this project the
letters received in opposition of the
project are as follows Colleen saw of 11
Dixwell Ave received on December 4th
Maureen Malloy of 37 Dixwell AB received
on December 4th
Bob Malone's excuse me Bob Mullins of 21
Farrell street received on December 4th
Therese hor Ian of 20 euclid ave
received on december 4th again these are
letters in opposition that are in
packets sue Susan Mafi of 22 Avon way
received on December 3rd Antonio Martin
of 37 presidents Lane received on
December 3rd ed wouldn't Jay Beck jr. of
69 Dixwell have received on December 3rd
Nancy Scanlon of 71 Glendale Road
received on December 3rd wing Chow of 11
Rosalyn Ave received on December 2nd
chrismyers of 19 Filbert Street received
on December 2nd Margery Jordan of 63
Glendale Road received on December 1st
Pat Barry of 67 Glendale Road received
on November 30th again these are letters
in opposition I'm now reading Arbonne
Burberry of 5 heritage Road received on
November 29th and that would conclude
the index of the comment letters new
comment letters we've received that was
in the planning board packets Thank You
mr. Stevens mr. Galvin
I move we close the public hearing
commotions been made to the second to
close the public hearing
all in favor aye all opposed
ok again mr. chairman through you and
the board the department has provided
the board members recommendation by the
department after consideration of the
site plan accompanying documents and the
comments received from the city staff
peer review consultant the department
recommends the board approved site plan
review under Quincy zoning ordinance
title 17 section nine point five point
one site plan review and section eight
point for Planned Unit development
redevelopment of a hospital site subject
to the below listed special in general
conditions special condition number one
the applicant shall provide 1 million
as in funding to the city of Quincy to
carry out off site improvements
identified during the review of the
project number two the applicant is
subject to the city of Quincy
inclusionary zoning ordinance and shall
be responsible for adhering to the
decision of the Quincy affordable
housing trust fund committee for this
project number three the applicant shall
comply with the sewer rehab fund
specified in Quincy Soudan zoning
ordinance title 15 section 15 - section
15 point 16 point 10 special condition
number four the applicant shall provide
a construction management plan to
include detailed traffic management
plans temporary traffic controls
crosswalk detours construction truck
routes in other protections as part of
the applications for the demolition
foundation and building permits for all
phases of construction the construction
management plans will be provided at
least one month prior to the start of
any construction to the city's traffic
engineer for review and approval the
applicant will want to take the
following conditions during each
construction phase of the project a
proponent will coordinate with the city
regarding all transportation related
construction impacts of the project be
the proponent will develop a program of
public notification of major
construction items see the proponent
will attend regularly scheduled meetings
bi-weekly
with the city to coordinate construction
activities D prior to the implementation
of any plan construction activities
within the public right-of-way the
contractor will submit to the city for
review and approval a traffic and
pedestrian management plan ie the
general contractor will implement a car
vanpool program in order to reduce
construction related traffic and parking
demands associated with the project
if the general contractor will be
encouraged to offer subsidies to workers
that use public transportation G
designated truck routes will be
established to govern how trucks ask
access the project site the goal of this
commitment is to have construction
trucks avoid using residential city
streets to the extent practical
construction contracts for the project
will include notification of this
provision H truck
stations will be set up on site for the
duration of project I secure fencing and
sidewalk staging protection will be
provided in areas affected by the
construction to the project to protect
nearby pedestrian and vehicular traffic
gate entrances into the construction
areas will be determined jointly with
the city J secure on-site storage will
be provided for tools and equipment in
an effort to minimize construction
construction related vehicle trips to
the site K full or partial street
closures will be avoided to the extent
possible should a partial Street closure
be necessary in order to offload
construction materials and/or complete
construction related activities the
closure will be limited to off-peak
periods as defined by the city so as to
minimize the impact on vehicular and
pedestrian flow police details will be
utilized as required by the city l
during construction activities as
required by the city a police detail
will be placed on site within the
sidewalk Street area to control
pedestrian bicycle and construction
construction vehicle conflicts and M
construction worker parking will be
prohibited along local roadways and the
vicinity of the project site and
violation of this prohibition may result
in the vehicle being ticketed or towed
by the city construction contracts for
this project will include notification
of this prohibition special condition
number five the applicant shall replace
the sidewalk for the entirety of the
product project furniture along Whitwell
street including sidewalk widening along
the frontage of the property to provide
traffic calming along Whitwell Street
the applicant applicant shall submit
design plans to T Pal and the Cyndi City
engineering office for review and
approval number six the applicant shall
submit to the city engineer a copy of
the final stormwater pollution
prevention plan swip SW PPP is the
acronym for review 30 days prior to the
commencing of construction number seven
the applicant shall be required to
obtain the stormwater management permit
from the city of Quincy Department of
Public Works prior to the issuance of a
building permit which shall be recorded
with the Norfolk County Registry of
Deeds prior to the start of construction
number eight within
60 days of the approval of this site
plan application the applicant shall
provide 125,000 dollars to fund the
planning and Community Development
departments independent peer review
engineer account in order for the city's
designated representative to continue to
review and advise on the final design
and construction of the stormwater
system at the city's request the
applicant shall provide additional
funding to complete the following
activities contemplated in this
condition by the designated
representative if needed that would be a
under the guidance of the city engineer
the city's designated representative
will perform a sub watershed modeling of
the area where the project site is
located the results of the modern
monitoring will be provided to the city
and the applicant to further inform the
stormwater analysis for the site in the
preparations of plans to manage
stormwater and infrastructure
improvements of the stormwater system
components within the watershed to
accommodate a minimum of a ten year
storm event be the city's designated
representative will perform the
independent peer review of the applicant
stormwater management permit
administered by the Department of Public
Works and see the city's designated
representative shall perform on-site
inspections of the construction of the
stormwater management system at the
following times at any soil testing
including verification of in-situ
infiltration rates performed on the site
including the areas where an existing
building has been demolished for
subsurface infiltration and detention
systems upon completion of excavation
and upon a completion of those of the
systems and installation and prior to
backfill at the time of stormwater water
quality units upon completion of their
installation connection to existing
public drainage systems and prior to
backfill the applicant shall provide 72
hours notice of said inspections the
city's designated representative shall
provide a report on the inspections to
the city engineering office in the
planning department special condition
number nine at the applicant shall
perform a water flow test with the
city's water department number 10 the
applicant shall continue to coordinate
with the city of Quincy Department of
Public Works to identify appropriate
infiltration and inflow projects the
applicant shall comply with the sewer
rehab fund specified in Quincy Center or
Quincy zoning ordinance title 15 section
16 point 10 number 11 the applicant
shall submit a stormwater operation and
maintenance plan which shall be recorded
at the Norfolk County Registry of Deeds
and will include the following the
stormwater management system owner the
party responsible for operation and
maintenance and estimated operations and
maintenance budget and a maintenance log
for special condition number 12 the
owner shall be required to submit a copy
of the completed stormwater operation
and maintenance plan on an M plan
inspection schedule and an evaluation
checklist form stamped by a professional
engineer annually to the city of Quincy
Department of Public War it works in
order to document compliance with the
approved onm plan number 13 the
applicant shall be required to submit
the final design and materials of the
site walkways to the Department of
Planning and Community Development the
Department of inspectional services and
the City Engineer for review and
approval prior to obtaining a building
permit this provision shall not prohibit
the applicant from obtaining a
demolition permit number 14 one week
prior to any lane disturbance activities
the applicant shall conduct an on-site
inspection with the city of Quincy
and/or the city's designated
representative to observe the erosion
controls installed at the site in review
the erosion controls anticipated to be
employed during construction 15 at any
point during construction the applicant
shall allow the city of Quincy and/or
the city's designated representative to
enter the site for the purposes of
making observations as to the compliance
of site construction with the approved
site plans and conditions of approval
number 16 of con completion of
construction the applicants engineer
shall provide a report to the city of
Quincy Department of Planning and
Community Development certifying that
the stormwater management system was
installed in accordance with the
approved plans the report shall include
a certification that the excavations of
the proposed filtration systems were
inspected prior to backfilling
and as built that the stormwater
management system shall be provided with
the report number 17 to be included in
the building permit application the
applicant shall provide a written
description describing how the planting
soil for the site will be manufactured
from the ascribed components on site
crushed stone imported subsoils in
compost a written commitment to install
adequate planting soil from off-site
sources in the event that on-site
resources are inadequate for on-site
manufacturing process in a list of
minimum soil volumes per plant type
including trees shrubs meadow and turf
areas special condition number 18 the
applicant shall provide a detailed
description of the irrigation system
proposed including coverage and inches
per week to be applied to all areas of
the site during the establishing during
establishing and after establishment for
review in approval by the city of Quincy
Department of Public Works prior to the
start of the installation of the
irrigation system number 19
prior to any installation of landscape
items the applicant shall notify the
city at least one week in advance 24 any
deviation from the approved landscape
plans the applicant shall file an
updated plan and specifications to the
planet department for review and
approval 21 the city's designated
representative shall perform on-site
inspections of the landscape
installations including plant materials
fencing retaining walls and pathways
number 22 prior to the issuance of
occupancy permit the applicant should
develop a parking plan and submit to T
pal for review that includes how parking
spaces will be assigned the distribution
of spaces per building in the number and
location of visitor parking number 23
prior to the issuance of an occupancy
permit the applicant shall provide a
shuttle bus system operating plan to t
pal for review and approval with the
following requirements a shuttle bus or
buses to transport residents to and from
the project site in Quincy Center MBTA
station the shuttle shall operate
weekdays 6:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4
p.m. to 7 p.m. on approximately
15-minute headways C the shuttle will
no extra costs for project residents d
the shuttle bus system shall be required
to run for an initial period of ten
years upon the conclusion of the ten
years the applicant shall submit a
report on the bus usage in operations to
the Planning Board who can extend this
condition for an additional 10-year
period number 24 the applicant shall
provide funding to the city of Quincy C
condition number one to carry out off
site improvements identified during the
review of the projects the funds shall
be used to make intersection of
provements as well as sidewalk and
pedestrian infrastructure improvements
in off-site locations adjacent to the
proposed site 25 the applicant will fund
a new MBTA shelter on the north side of
Whitwell Street along the project
frontage 26 the applicant will
coordinate with the Planning Department
to make the MBTA where future transit
ridership demand 27 residents of the
proposed development will not be
eligible to attain a city of Quincy
residential parking permit 28 the
applicant shall identify and notify a
transportation network companies of
on-site pick-up and drop-off locations
for each building prior to occupancy
permit 29 the following parking and
transportation demand management
measures shall be implemented as part of
the project a designate a full time
on-site transportation coordinator to
oversee transportation issues including
carpooling car sharing parking moving
trucks in to work with residents to
raise awareness of public transportation
bicycling and walking opportunities B
provide orientation packets to new
residents containing information on
available transportation choices
including transit route schedules and
Ashla Park shuttle service C provide
information on travel alternatives via
residents only website and postings in
the clubhouse this will include include
promotion of the MassDOT new ride ride
share program in MBTA bus and rail
schedules d offer new tenants a
complimentary one-month MBTA pass to
encourage transit use e provide to car
share spaces and centrally located
parking area
additional car service spacious may be
required at the city of Quincy Planning
Board's discretion
pending the post occupancy traffic and
parking monitoring program F provide a
sheltered bus stop on site for the Ashla
Park shuttle G provide on site a secure
bicycle parking in each garage for
residents in outdoor bicycle parking for
visitor use H provide preferential
parking for low emission and alternate
alternative fuel vehicles I
transportation monitoring program the
applicant shall conduct a biennial
traffic and parking monitoring program
with the results submitted to the city
of Quincy for a six year period
beginning two years after the initial
occupancy the program shall include
automatic traffic recorder counts at the
site driveways for continuous 24 hour
period on a typical weekday travel mode
survey of residents of the site weekday
AM and PM peak hour turning movement
counts and operation analysis at Adams
Street and Whitwell Street shuttle
ridership and on-site parking supply
demand and utilization special condition
number 30 prior to the issuance of an
occupancy permit the applicant shall
submit a residential trash valet service
plan if a residential trash valet
service plan is not implemented the
applicant shall submit an alternative
residential trash plan to the Department
of Health for review and approval 31 the
applicant shall submit a written rodent
control plan to the Health Department
for review and approval prior to any
site activity said plan must be designed
for the duration of the project and
include at a minimum the following name
and contact information of a licensed
pest control operator to be retained by
the project proponent for the duration
of the project scope of the proposed
plan for control of rodents include a
number of bait stations location of bait
stations frequency of monitoring bait
stations anticipated length of service a
summary of actions to be taken to
prevent rodent problems at the
construction site special condition of a
32 the applicant shall develop and
submit a written dust control plan to
the Department Health for review and
approval prior to any site activity said
dust control plan is to be in
lamented during any site activities to
ensure compliance with state air quality
regulations 33 the applicant shall be
required to submit plans to the Quincy
Health Department which are stamped by a
Massachusetts registered professional
engineer or registered architect for the
proposed swimming pool said plans must
conform with 105 of the code of
Massachusetts regulations section 435
and be subject to satisfactory plan
review prior to the obtaining a pool
construction permit from the Quincy
Health Department number 34 the
applicant shall conduct a pre demolition
hazardous material survey ie asbestos
containing materials for ascent lights
PCB contaminating PCB containing
materials including ballasts and mercury
containing thermostats and switches etc
and provide a copy of the survey to the
Quincy Health Department
if hazardous materials are found in the
building then the applicant or it's
licensed bateman contractor shall
consult with the Quincy Health
Department regarding abatement measures
and monitoring of abatement work 35 the
applicant shall notify the city and
provide copies of any filings made in
accordance with the Massachusetts
contingency plan relating to any
historical release of hazardous
materials or the discovery of any new
release 36 upon completion of the
project the applicant shall furnish to
the Planning Department and the city
engineer the digital file as built plan
showing all utilities building
footprints reference bounds and
benchmarks defining the total site
facilities and rights-of-way that would
conclude the department's recommendation
Thank You mr. Stevens the wishes of the
board mr. Kelly the recommendations
reference the applicant if the applicant
should sell this project at any time
because these could go on for over 10
years as as I read through them if the
applicant would the conditions continue
to be the responsibility of the the
buyer
where it just references the applicant
in our proposed conditions aren't they
would but I think your points well-taken
and it's an easy at it I would just when
you record conditions put the applicant
and Ord successors and interest if you
add that phrase then you'll be covered
but it's contemplated under the process
that the site can only be developed and
then and you're saying this could go on
for 10 years you believe well this isn't
conditions that understood well so you
should and then maybe we should look at
to the extent there are any conditions
that are binding after the fact that
maybe we make some sort of condition of
a deed restriction or some sort of
filing at the registry so there's meat
to these conditions or you know recourse
to the city if they're not met Thank You
mr. chairman through you it's part of
the standard conditions with every
Planning Board case that every decision
is recorded a copy of it is here within
60 days of the expiration of the 20-day
appeal period the applicant shall record
the endorsed decision at the Registry of
Deeds evidence of such recordings shall
be submitted to the planning department
and to the building commissioner prior
to the initiation of any construction
activities the applicant shall also be
responsible for recording at the
Registry of Deeds the stormwater system
operations and maintenance manual again
that's a standard condition that goes
with all of the department's decisions
mr. mayor mr. Govan mr. chairman
I would move that we approve this
project based upon the recommendations
of the staff I find that the bylaw would
allow a more dense project than it is
being proposed considering that the
bylaw allows one unit per 1,250 square
feet of area and the building height
currently the hospital I think as six
storey buildings up there four storey
six the maximum height of this project
is six although most of the buildings
are either four or five and the bylaw
allows the applicant to go to eight
but they've cut it back and this most
recent submission they've moved the
buildings further away from the
residential area so with that and noting
the solicit notwithstanding the fact
that it's recorded noting the solicitors
comments and recommendations I would
just amend any reference to the
applicant to include their successes in
the signs Thank You mr. Kelvin is there
a second to the motion
all those in favor say aye
yeah we we never wind up let's close the
hearing on the proposal which would
never bode
we close the public hearing but we
didn't vote it we did after we read in
names of the okay alright so we only
fits inside and we need to do is to
approve the minutes from the meetings
including the site visit so a motion to
accept the minutes from the second all
those in favor motion to close the
meeting
