Opponents of the proposed Chapter 40B project on School Street came out in force for Wednesday night’s meeting of the Manchester-By-The-Sea's Zoning Board of Appeals.
More than 125 people attended the Zoom meeting and more than a dozen spoke out against the project, which would clear seven acres of land on top of Shingle Place Hill on the western side of School Street to build 136 apartment units.
No one, except developer Geoffrey Engler of SLV School St. LLC and civil engineers working for the developer, spoke in favor of the project.
Because the town has less than 10 percent of its housing stock in the “affordable” category, the developer – Geoffrey Engler of SLV School St. LLC – can bypass all the town’s boards and commissions, as long as the ZBA approves a comprehensive permit for the project. Engler has agreed to include 34 affordable units as part of the project.
ZBA Chair Sarah Mellish said at the start of the meeting that the ZBA had received a petition signed by 681 people asking the board to deny the comprehensive permit. She added that the board had received “hundreds and hundreds” of letters opposing the project.
“We have not received a single letter supporting this project,” said Mellish.
Mellish went on to explain that if the ZBA simply denies the permit, there was a strong likelihood that the denial would be overturned by the House Appeals Committee, where the town would have no ability to apply conditions or waivers.
Mellish said the board’s other option was to approve the project but with conditions to protect the town’s interests as best as possible.
“We do not take this lightly,” said Mellish.
Even if the ZBA approves the project with conditions, she said it was likely to end up in court for years, costing the town and Engler a lot of money over time.
Attorney Luke Legere, representing the Citizens Initiative for Manchester Affordable Housing Inc., went over a long list of what he called “critical unresolved issues” concerning the project.
“There are no conditions that can be put on this project that can adequately protect the local interests,” said Legere.
He called the single access road into the project from School Street as “extremely problematic.”
Scott Horsley of the Manchester Essex Conservation Trust spoke about the impact the project would have on the surrounding wetlands, particularly the vernal pools just north of the project.
Alan MacMillan, a longtime member of the Rockport Conservation Commission, spoke about the possible effect the project would have on Manchester’s water supply.
Daniel Hill, an attorney for MECT, said, “the project presents … unmitigated threats to public safety, environment and public health.” He called for the project to be completely redesigned on a smaller scale.
“This project presents more questions than answers,” said Hill. “There is no other conclusion to reach than a denial of this comprehensive permit.”
Marilyn Kobus of 2 Bell Court said the town needs affordable housing but adding 136 apartments to gain 34 affordable units was not worth it.
Becky Jaques, the chair of the Select Board, said that the lot where the project is proposed was not included as part of the environmentally protected land because it was considered “undevelopable.”
Patrice Murphy of MECT said that many settled in Manchester to escape the summer heat of Boston. She said it would be wrong to cut down the trees, where many find a cool spot during hot days.
Sandy Bodmer-Turner of 89 School St. raised questions about Engler’s status with the state housing agencies, saying he had been suspended from developing any new Chapter 40B projects. Other speakers also raised this point.
Engler admitted that he had been suspended but only for 12 months and that time was nearly over. The School Street project was not affected by the suspension because it was underway before the suspension began.
The board closed the public hearing on the project at the end of the meeting by a vote of 6-0. Member Sean Zahn did not attend the meeting.
The board now has 40 days or until Sept. 6 to set any conditions and waivers for the project and to vote on the comprehensive permit. The board has 14 days after that to file that decision with the state.
The board will meet next at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, August 3. At the suggestion of George Pucci of the Town Counsel’s office, they will begin by taking a consensus of the board to decide if they are looking at an approval with conditions or a denial. If it is an approval with conditions, they will begin going through the proposed conditions and waivers.