HomeMy Public PortalAboutMaster Comments 10 Jan 2018_201801111717269552ROBERT M. LAURICELLA, ARCHITECT
260 Mt Auburn St. (1-D), Watertown, MA, 02472, Tel.(617) 913-6237,
1/7/18
To Planning Board about 385 Pleasant St
1. What are benefits to Watertown Community of this development beyond tax benefits.
2. Why are the tax benefits never quantified as part of this review..
3. How does this development improve the traffic situation on Pleasant Street. The quantity obviously
makes the traffic worse not better
4. Why do we relieve zoning criteria to aid this development. Parking reduction.
Why do we encourage retail when there is no evidence that retail is growing. Arsenal Street should
demonsrrate that there is almost no market for retail. Pleasant Street coplexes have no retail in spite of
this policy.
6. Why do we encourage retail which is so far from public transit that it will only encourage more car traffic
7. Why encourage the re -use of a very marginal building at the expense of setting the building back to
create a more pleasant pedestrian environment.
8. Why can't we do something about the telephone poles in front of this building. Could they have been
moved to the rear of the buildings, creating a utility alley. Could this development at least insist that the
poles be straighten which I believe is something the electric companies are supposed to do as of right.
9. Why is there no leadership from the city on these developments. In over 2 years of attending these
meetings I rarely hear any one from the city speak of the planning benefits beyond taxes of any of these
developments.
In Conclusion, although this development is notparticularly bad and does have benefits It seents that it is
about tinte that the town re-evaluate its process and goals to achieve the benefits discussed in the
Comprehensive Platt.
Robert Lauricella
260 Mt Auburn Street
Adams, Andrea
From: Magoon, Steven
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 9:46 AM
To: Marchesano, Ingrid; Schreiber, Gideon; Adams, Andrea
Cc: Woodland, Kenneth
Subject: FW: Development on Pleasant Street - Plot adjacent to the Tesla Garage - VOTE NO!
Please provide this comment to the Planning Board as part of the record. Thanks
From: Kenneth Woodland [mailto:woodlandkenneth@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2017 8:20 PM
To: Magoon, Steven <smagoon@watertown-ma.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Development on Pleasant Street - Plot adjacent to the Tesla Garage - VOTE NO!
Hi Steve,
Could you forward to the Planning Board per the request below.
Thank you,
Ken
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Linda Helfet <1helfet@me.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:00 PM
Subject: Development on Pleasant Street - Plot adjacent to the Tesla Garage - VOTE NO!
To: Woodland Kenneth <woodlandkennetht7a pnail.com>
Cc: Barbara Ruskin <ruskinb00na,icloud.com>
Hello Ken,
Would you please forward this letter to the Planning Committee?
Thanks,
Linda
I've been thinking about the impact of the development on the parcel next to the Tesla garage. We attended the
Planning Committee meeting where it was presented.
Having heard the developers' proposal, every time I now drive past that property I am angered by the greed of
developers who try to squeeze money out of totally improbable parcels of land. I'm writing to ask the Planning
Committee to visit the site and take a very hard look at what is being asked for here. I'm proud to live at Repton
Place where the developer took a very responsible approach to development, including a spacious green street
boundary, and many trees planted to improve the environment. Thus new proposition does just the opposite.
Issues of concern in thisyrouosal:
1. Buildings which will block light from existing homes, and cause lack of privacy from new neighbors looking
right over their homes
2. There is a large red existing building right on the sidewalk, walling off the street. The proposed new
buildings on the East side of the plot will be squeezed into a ridiculously small area, which will continue the
effect of walling off the street. The developers' plan to plant little bushes will in no way replace the values
listed above provided by the mature trees which will be removed.
3. Removal of beautiful mature trees which soften the environment, help clean the air and provide shade for
neighborig properties.
I would like to suimest:
1. Let the berm and trees remain, and build a much needed a park around the rails ... we need every bit of green
lung possible in the ever-increasing concrete development in the Pleasant Street corridor.
2. Give no permission for the building of those smaller buildings on the East side of the plot. Allowing the
developer to fill that narrow, inappropriate plot of land would set a very bad precedent. Watertown
residents look to you to protect and enhance the town and improve quality of life for residents. Please
vote to block the smaller buildings proposed for this site.
Respectfully submitted by,
Linda Helfet
3 Repton Place
Watertown MA 02472
Linda Helfet
IhelfetAme.com
Cell: 857-231-0569
Home: 617-744-6117
Adams, Andrea
From: Adams, Andrea
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 5:02 PM
To: 'Danielle Morgan'
Cc: Schreiber, Gideon
Subject: RE: key points for discussion - Planning Committee 12/5/17
Hello, Ms. Morgan:
Thank you for your Email.
It will be distributed to the Planning Board, as well as to the Petitioner.
I also offer the following comments in line with your Email, below.
.Andr-ea .Ada- m s
Senior Planner
Community Development & Planning
Administration Building
149 Main Street
Watertown, MA 02472
617-972-6417
From: Danielle Morgan[mailto:danielle.morgan0@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 3:52 PM
To: Adams, Andrea <aadams@watertown-ma.gov>
Cc: gscheiber@watertown-ma.gov
Subject: key points for discussion - Planning Committee 12/5/17
Ms Adams and Mr Scheiber
I attended and spoke at the last planning meeting in Nov during discussion of the proposed Pleasant Street
development. It was agreed that this development merited further considered attention to details.
I am unsure if I will be able to make the next meeting 12/5/17 so, in preparation, I would like these 3 aspects
below to be discussed and considered by the Planning Committee. These are related to effects of Buildings D,E
and F.
1. Is the actual height of the proposed 5 storey building (Building F), plus elevation on which it is being
built, in compliance with the height limitations for new development in Watertown? Explanation: the current
Field building is elevated well above the level of Pleasant Street. the Field building is being incorporated into
the new development.The next 2 buildings E and F are expected to also be on that same elevation.
The public needs an answer to a) this question above and b) is the elevated land currently there going to be
removed so new development (building D,E,F) is at street level.
Response: DCDP staff has requested that the Petitioner clarify how the elevation drawings of these
buildings have been rendered and how they sit on the site relative to the street, and the way the site
slopes upwards towards the West. However, the way the Town measures height for zoning
purposes, the project complies with the requirements for this Zoning District.
2. Are town ordinances re: light pollution expected to be met by interior and exterior lighting at buildings D,E
and F? Given the mixed use of these buildings, (commercial and residential) internal and external lighting are
likely to be turned on all night with impact for neighbors on Waltham Street, Swetts Court and streets beyond
these two.
Response: Watertown's Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, controls signage and exterior
illumination. That section has been updated to provide stronger protections against exterior lighting
glare and off -site impacts. As for internal illumination from the buildings which have residential
components, I am not familiar with any requirements that have been imposed to address your
concerns.
3. It is proposed that service vehicles back in at the west entrance for Building F. Does this comply with town
ordinances re: noise pollution especially during early AM or late night hours as this can contribute adversely to
ambient noise and impact the sleep of the residents on Waltham Street and Swetts Court. (Already being
impacted by reversing trucks at Olympiad Moving Company).
Response: The Board of Health, in conjunction with the Building Department, provide the primary
enforcement for noise issues during and after construction. Watertown has a Noise Ordinance that
stipulates in part that `All devices employed in construction or demolition shall be prohibited from use
during the hours of.-
(1) 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. from Monday through Friday;
(2) 7:00 p.m. on Fridays through 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays; and
(3) 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays through 8:00 a.m. on Sundays."
The Planning Board has also routinely included conditions on approved projects that limit the
days/hours of delivery trucks and waste management vehicles so as to lessen the noise impacts.
It should be noted that residents of #2,4,6,8,10 and 12 Swetts Court are all directly impacted by the new
development - approx 20 people- in addition to many Waltham Street residents.
Thank you for bringing these 3 questions to the attention of the Planning Committee. Do not hesitate to contact
me with any questions.
J Danielle Morgan
#8 Swetts Court.
978 505 1753
Adams, Andrea
From:
Marchesano, Ingrid
Sent:
Monday, September 18, 2017 7:37 AM
To:
John Hawes (jbhawes@gmail.com); jeffreywbrown@comcast.net; Janet Buck (janetbuck211
@gmail.com); Gary Shaw; pwhitney.wpb@gmail.com
Cc:
Magoon, Steven; Schreiber, Gideon; Adams, Andrea
Subject:
FW: Comment 385 Pleasant Street plan
FYI
From: Kaihla Olivar[maiito:kaihla.olivar@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 11:07 AM
To: Marchesano, Ingrid
Subject; Comment 385 Pleasant Street plan
Dear Ms. Marchesano:
Would you please forward my comment below to the entire Planning Board regarding the proposed
development at 385 Pleasant Street.
Thank you,
Kaihla Olivar
September 16, 2017
Dear Members of the Watertown Planning Board:
I am disturbed that the trees on the berm on Pleasant St. may be killed if the proposed development at 385
Pleasant Street becomes a reality. Please take the time to consider preserving this area of greenery in
Watertown.
We need more trees, espeeially old trees, on Pleasant St. not fewer. As a resident of Pleasant St., I appreciate
their beauty, shade, oxygen, and sound barrier.
That those trees may be destroyed to build small apartments and office space is further troubling. The
apartments will take away beauty, will provide no shade, and the added cars of the people in those apartments
and offices will increase the CO levels and the noise levels on Pleasant St. Trees provide us with health, well-
being and beauty. We need more trees, not fewer.
Please keep those trees on Pleasant St. for the health of the neighborhoods and the well-being of Watertown
residents.
If you should find against the trees, please make it a requirement that trees of a similar width be planted, not
young trees.
I thank you for your consideration.
Adams, Andrea
From: Adams, Andrea
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 4:41 PM
To: 'Cindy Lee'; Magoon, Steven
Cc: wyork@gilmac.com; Dartagnan Brown P
Subject: RE: 385Pleasant Street - Comments from Ms. Ruskin C COP
Hello, Cindy:
The DCDP office just received another public comment by telephone from Ms. Ruskin,
Spring Street.
She will be unable to attend tonight's Community Meeting, but wished to pass on some
comments to the Petitioner.
As I understand her comments, Ms. Ruskin suggested that the Petitioner could help
address if not completely address the previously articulated concerns about removal of
the berm at the rear of the site by raising/lifting the proposed new residential
Townhouses (Buildings A, B, C), and placing them on footings of some sort.
This would then allow parking underneath all of these structures, thereby preserving
the berm.
-4n6fYea ✓ da- ncs
Senior Planner
Community Development & Planning
Administration Building
149 Main Street
Watertown, MA 02472
617-972-6417
1
Adams, Andrea
From: Cindy Lee <clee@embarestudio.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 2:02 PM /� `(•p A
To: Adams, Andrea �O /1
Cc: wyork@gilmac.com; Dartagnan Brown
Subject: 385 Pleasant Street - public comments
Hi Bill and Andrea,
Charlene Fahey (617-024-6562) who lives on Conant Road, off of Pleasant St called to expressed her concern about the
heavy traffic situation on Pleasant Street and that she thought there are too few fire hydrants along Pleasant Street. She
said she is unable to attend tonight's community meeting.
Thanks,
Cindy Lee, RA I Senior Associate
EMBARC STUDIO architecture + design 1 60 K Street, 3m Floor Boston, MA 02127
o: 617.766.8330 Ext, 107 1 d: 617.765.8652 1 f: 617.766.8331 c: 617.633.9186
www.embarestudio.com
Adams, Andrea
From: Christopher Chapron <cchapron@gmall.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 8AA AM
To: Marchesano, Ingrid; Magoon, Steven; Adams, Andrea; Woodland, Kenneth
Subject: Letter Against 38S Pleasant street development
To The Planning Board
I would like this letter submitted as an argument against the proposed 385 Pleasant street development. I cannot
attend the community meeting on July 27th due to work
I have lived in Watertown for over 14 years currently reside only a few blocks from this proposed
development. I have lived along the "Pleasant street corridor" during that time. In the beginning, I liked the
idea of converting the older property at 118 Pleasant street into 40+ apartment units. However after the next 3
developments were constructed, I've come to the realization, this is no longer in the best interest of the
neighbors and the town
The proposed development at 385 Pleasant street is too much. I am not going to comment on the traffic and the
locations of this and that. We own cars, parking and traffic will always be an issue that's only going to get
worse I however want to ask you, The Planning Board, when is this development too -much, 5
buildings? Please, walk the space, it's too much. Will you be the first group to actually say "No, this is NOT
the best you can do." A 5 story building is too big, 5 buildings are too much. There is already another large
complex being built at the old Julian crane site and the Howard/Bacon complex is under construction. Pleasant
street is already becoming a tunnel of over development. This corridor is done, it can't handle more, we can't
handle more.
I'm sure the neighbors of Waltham street much prefer their natural berm of trees and landscaping over concrete
and tiny shrubs. Its their "screen" against the traffic and developments. Don't promise 1st floor commercial
space without a real tenant. We have plenty of empty storefronts already in Watertown (old Rockland trust
bank, the former Farmers market kitchen eatery on arsenal, the empty store front at the intersection of Waverly
and Main). The last 1st floor commercial space tenant was at 235 Pleasant street which is a realty office,
Delaney & Venezia, Not what the surrounding neighborhoods had envisioned.
There are more negatives than positives, red flags that you have to see. Don't turn a blind eye to the neighbors
and the residents this development directly impacts. I ask that you evaluate this development as a resident, as a
member of the Watertown community, is this a development that helps or harms the us? Pleasant street can't
handle more. Enough is enough already. This development is too big on piece of land that is too small.
Sincerely,
Chris Chapron
Buick Street
Watertown
Adams, Andrea
From: Marchesano, Ingrid
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 10:31 AM
To: Magoon, Steven; Schreiber, Gideon; Adams, Andrea
Subject: FW: 385 Pleasant Street
Hello Steve, this is a second comment for 385 Pleasant - I forwarded the first one
yesterday. Both are asking me to have their comments forwarded to the Planning
Board. Please advise, thank you, Ingrid
-----Original Message -----
From: Michele Waldman [mailto:michelewaldman@rcn.comj
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 10:43 PM
To: Marchesano, Ingrid
Subject: 385 Pleasant Street
To The Planning Board:
My name is Michele Waldman and I live in Siena Village in East Watertown. The other
day I took a walk over to the proposed building site at 385 Pleasant Street. My first
thought was why would Amstel Heritage want to build here as it is not an attractive site.
That thought aside, that little stretch of woods is a great benefit to the homes on
Waltham Street, shielding them from noise and dust. The trees also serve to filter air
pollution from Pleasant Street as well as providing shade during the summer. On
closer examination there are many large mature trees; their loss would be a pity.
Wildlife make their home wherever the environment is sustainable and Watertown is
rapidly becoming a city of asphalt and concrete. When we lose that connection to
nature we loose part of our humanity. The satisfactions based on greed are short lived.
Trees provide pleasure for hundreds of years.
Please do not let this project proceed.
Thank you.
Please forward to the Planning Board ASAP
1
Adams, Andrea
From:
David Meshoulam <daveedmesh @gmai1.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, July 04, 2017 5:13 PM
To:
Marchesano, Ingrid; Adams, Andrea
Cc:
Libby Shaw; Elodia Thomas
Subject:
385 Pleasant Street Development
Dear Ms. Marchesano,
Could you please forward the email below to the entire Planning Board members?
Sincerely,
David Meshoulam, PhD
Dear Members of the Watertown Planning Board,
I am writing to you as a concerned resident of Watertown over the proposed development at 385 Pleasant
Street. I have been keeping tabs on the status of the project and the impact that this project may have on traffic,
quality of life, and the greenery of our town and of the area. Primarily, though, I am writing to voice my
concern over the proposed removal of 52 significant trees in the area directly behind the proposed structure.
Trees, as you no doubt know, provide numerous substantial financial and emotional benefits to local residents,
to the entire community, and to natural habitat; they not merely provide shade in the summer and windbreak in
the winter, but they remove pollutants and help control water runoff during storms. As the climate changes, we
face enormous challenges to build resiliency in the face of hotter summers and more extreme weather events
and trees must remain a crucial component of our planning for the future. The proposal to replace the mature
trees on this site with new and smaller trees is little comfort. New trees do not provide the same level of benefits
as mature trees, nor will they for decades to come, and considering the lack of attention given to maintaining
new plantings, may never provide benefits at all.
I request that you take time to consider preserving this parcel of greenery in our town. As developers continue
to buy up land in Watertown to produce housing and retail space it is crucial that we take a stand for one of our
most important public resources, our trees. Over the past years too many of them have been removed to make
room for new development. We must take into account the town we want for our children and grandchildren. I
request that you take the trees into account in your deliberations,
Sincerely,
David Meshoulam, PhD
49 Oliver Street, Watertown
Adams, Andrea
From: Libby Shaw <elshaw@mit.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 1:38 PM
To: Adams, Andrea
Cc: Magoon, Steven
Subject: [TFW] concern regarding 325 Pleasant Street development proposal
Attachments: PastedGraphic-2.tiff; TFW statement 325 Pleasant Street.pdf
Hi, Andrea:
Trees for Watertown is greatly concerned about the substantial loss of natural habitat and green canopy that would result from
elimination of the forested berm at 325 Pleasant Street, as currently proposed in Amstel Heritage LLC's plans.
I hope you will employ every tool available to Watertown to guide this project toward a design that is much less injurious to the
abutting residential neighborhood and the natural environment.
We've prepared a statement which I'll present at the Community Meeting tonight. I am attaching a copy to give you advance
understanding of our concern.
Thank you,
Libby
Libby Shaw
President, Trees for Watertown
daytime 617-253-5045
eves 617-926-0929
htip://trecsforwatertown.org
JUN 2 6 ton
PLANNING BOARD
WATERTOWN, MA
Trees for Watertown Statement
regarding Amstel Heritage development proposal for 385 Pleasant Street
Amstel Heritage Community Meeting
Monday, June 26, 2017
Trees for Watertown asks The Town of Watertown and Amstel Heritage LLC to consider the profound
negative Impact which eliminating the railroad berm and its substantial woodland would have on the
residential neighborhood abutting the 385 Pleasant Street property, and on the local natural
environment.
This long, tall berm runs approximately East-West on the eastern part of the Amstel Heritage property
along Pleasant Street. The berm borders six homes on Waltham Street. Over decades, a forest ecosystem
has sprung up on this berm, including dozens of large trees.
"D
M
D M
Mz z i
O m
z°'
O U
D -.'
DO
L�J
Trees for Watertown visited the berm this weekend to take a look at the forest and to inventory the so-
called "significant" trees -significant as defined in neighboring Cambridge's Tree Ordinance to mean a
diameter of 8 inches or larger at chest height (DBH).
We counted 52 trees of significant diameter on the berm. Species included black cherry, black locust,
silver maple, Norway maple, American elm, pin oak, scarlet oak, Siberian elm and a handsome Mazzard
cherry.
Thirteen of these 52 large trees are quite substantial --18 inches DBH or larger. We noted many other
small trees and other plant species as well, and plenty of birds, and entries to a woodchuck burrow.
This woodland habitat is entirely wild and neglected. A park it is not. But it is a rich natural island
bordering a desert of dusty industrial hardscape and traffic. Due to its location, size, and maturity, the
forest plays important climate -tempering and ecological roles in this area of Watertown.
Amstel's current proposal removes this berm entirely
16 and 22 Waltham Street. The long row of trees behind the houses
are all on the former railroad berm.
and the other trees behind the houses are all on the berm.
LU
_
a m Z
N
W
I
�, Z O
j Zcc
W
W
ga
H-3:
cc
Removing the berm and its forest would radically impact the residential neighborhood on Waltham
Street. Here are some of the ways this large berm with its forest of tall deciduous trees benefits the
homes on Waltham Street:
• The abundant tree canopy filters air pollution from Pleasant Street
• Positioned south of the. neighborhood, this deciduous canopy provides cooling shade in summer while
letting sunlight through in winter.
• The forest and berm provide an effective neighborhood windbreak.
• The berm and trees provide an effective buffer against the noise of Pleasant Street traffic and industry
• This forest provides this residential neighborhood. with a priceless connection with nature. Some
examples: the sound and motion of wind moving through leaves; the songs and activity of nesting birds...
In Spring, a mist of new green leaves and the beauty of flowering black cherry; in Fall, a moving tapestry
of changing leaves and view of migrating birds stopping for food and shelter.
Removing this berm and its forest would also be ruination for the ecosystem and wildlife corridor
segment that this lush green habitat provides.
For woodland mammals, insects and birds, this forest provides vital habitat and a key portion of wildlife
corridor. As if to underscore the importance of preserving wildlife habitat in the city, we saw a Northern
Flicker foraging in the leaf litter when we visited the berm this weekend. This is not a common bird in the
city, and its numbers have declined 49% in the last fifty years.
We urge Amstel Heritage LLC to fundamentally redesign this project to preserve this forest, in order to
minimize negative environmental impact on the abutting residential neighborhood and on Watertown's
ecosystem.
Sincerely,
Libby Shaw
President, Trees for Watertown
daytime 617-253-5045
eves 617-926-0929
c
~ o
tool for Wa�et�
https://treesforwatertown.org
https://facebook.com/treesforwatertown
RE EIVED
JUN 2 6 2017
PLANNING BOARD
WATERTOWN, MA
Northern flicker
Female C. a. auratus