A proposal for this 61-unit condominium development in Boston’s North End has the developer at odds with the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
He said, she said.
Boston’s planning agency maintains the developer of a controversial 5-story condominium development in Boston’s North End is expected to revise the project. But the builder says he is not contemplating any changes.
A development team headed by Steven Fustolo hopes to replace a parking lot at 30 North Margin St. with 61 condominiums. The building would include a four-level automated underground garage for 243 cars. But at a hearing last month, opponents argued that more cars would overwhelm already-jammed streets in the close-knit neighborhood. Abutters also said that digging 37 feet below grade to create the parking facility would exacerbate the depletion of groundwater and threaten nearby homes.
Kristin Kara, the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s project director, declined to be interviewed. In an e-mail, a BRA spokeswoman said, “It is our understanding that the developer is revising the project given the feedback that they heard at the community meeting Â… Once we have been notified that the developer is ready to present the revisions to the community, we will schedule a community meeting and set the comment period deadline two weeks from the date of that meeting.”
But Fustolo insisted he never told the BRA that his team was revising the project.
“We have not decided whether to make any changes,” he said. “I don’t want to say there was some sort of error in communication, but that’s not where we are at this time. I’m not trying to be evasive, but I don’t know where the BRA got that from. We are waiting until the comment period ends and then we’ll decide how to proceed.”
Typically, the BRA provides a comment period for abutters and interested parties to advise the city about a development. In this case, the time for letters has been extended indefinitely.
While many residents favor redevelopment of the unsightly parking lot at North Margin and Stillman streets, they insist that two parking spaces per condo, as well as 121 commercial spaces, are too many for the neighborhood.
“We are not against reasonable development,” said Pasqua Scibelli, who owns a two-bedroom condominium on nearby Wiget Street. “But many of us don’t understand why a 61-unit development needs so many parking spaces. Why does a studio need two spaces? This is a very congested neighborhood and many residents do not even own a car.”
In addition to parking issues, Scibelli said many property owners are worried about the impact of below-ground construction on nearby homes.
“We are concerned because if the new construction causes hundreds of thousands of dollars damage to our building, the developer will be long gone and we will have to pay for it ourselves,” she said. “The city has to take this seriously and, in the long run, the city has to make sure the developer does the right thing.”
While many residents said they could support a smaller project with fewer parking spaces, there was concern that digging so deep could threaten the foundations of nearby homes.
‘Lots of Density’
House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, whose district includes the North End, opposes the project, in part because of concern about excavation for the building. The Big Dig weakened the foundations of many dwellings during 16 years of construction, according to a spokesman for the speaker.
“We are waiting for the project developer to come back with their revised proposal,” said David Guarino in an e-mail from DiMasi’s office. “Once we see it, we may be able to comment further.”
The North Margin Street project is not the only one that has raised objections in the historic neighborhood. Earlier this month, Gilchrest Assoc. abandoned plans to demolish the three-level, steel-and-concrete facility at 585 Commercial St. and replace it with a 6-story, brick-and-glass building. The waterfront project would have featured 68 one- and two-bedroom condominiums, a health club, marina and 148 parking underground parking spaces.
While there was some support to replace the run-down building, dozens of North End residents opposed the $50 million development because they said it was too dense and too tall. Some homeowners objected to what they called the “privatization” of public parkland because the parcel is adjacent to open space managed by the state Department of Recreation and Conservation. Others said the neighborhood needs a larger workforce and more affordable housing.
“We already have lots of density and high-priced condominiums going up in the North End. Why would we want more?” said Sandy Lopez, a neighborhood resident.
