Three-Story Limit on Main?

A rendering presented to the Beacon City Council shows how Main Street might look if the four-story project were approved. The Hudson Beach Glass building is at left.

Beacon council must decide on trade-offs

A Beacon developer wants to bring affordable housing, office space and a public park to Main Street — attractive amenities for any city — but says he needs four floors to do so.

The project, called 2 Cross St., was introduced earlier this year to the City Council and in November to the Planning Board by developer Joe Donovan. The City Council must approve a special-use permit for any four-story building to be built on Main.

The proposal calls for integrating the building at 172 Main St. that’s occupied by Riverwinds Gallery and the brick building at 4 Cross St. with new construction and an undeveloped lot that sits between the buildings. On Main Street, Donovan wants to construct a four-story building with retail on the ground floor, nine units of affordable senior housing on the second and around 10,000 square feet of office space on the top two floors. The back side of the complex, on Cross Street, would be three floors.

A portion of the undeveloped lot, which has been used in recent years by the Green Teen gardening program, would remain as a park. Donovan said he would help relocate Riverwinds, the Green Teens and tenants living at 4 Cross St.

Two years ago, he said, the project could have been easily accomplished. But when the City Council revised the Central Main Street zoning district last year, it moved the Cross Street parcel (which does not face Main) into the PB (Business Off-Street Parking) zone, which does not allow office or multi-family uses. The revision also added the requirement that the City Council approve any new four-story buildings in the Central Main Street zone.

A rendering presented to the Beacon City Council shows how Main Street might look if the four-story project were approved. The Hudson Beach Glass building is at left.

Even with a permit from the council, a fourth floor under the new zoning must be “set back” at least 15 feet so it’s smaller than the three floors below it.

Beacon’s historic district, which regulates design standards, adds yet another layer of complexity. 172 Main is in the historic district; 4 Cross is on a list of parcels that could soon be added.

On Monday night, Donovan asked the council for three concessions: to bring his Cross Street parcel under Central Main Street zoning; to approve a parking plan that would put some off-site parking in nearby residential neighborhoods but add eight more spaces than required; and to allow him to construct a four-story building without a setback.

If approved, he said, his building would still be 7 feet shorter than the neighboring three-story Hudson Beach Glass building, which is also in the historic district (and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places).

But after four-story buildings were constructed at 226, 249 and 344 Main — none of which would have been approved under the revised zoning — Donovan acknowledged his plan might be a tough sell.

Four floors are “a huge sticking point,” he said, “but in return we’re offering a lot of stuff. We’re offering a public plaza; we’re offering two floors of work space; we’re offering affordable senior housing and additional public parking.”

Donovan’s proposal comes just after the council began its own discussion on whether four-story buildings should be allowed in return for “trade-offs” from developers that benefit the public. A public hearing is scheduled for Jan. 21 on a law that would make trade-offs mandatory for four stories.

Although serious negotiations on 2 Cross St. won’t begin until next month, after Lee Kyriacou replaces Randy Casale as mayor and newcomers Dan Aymar-Blair and Air Rhodes join the council, preliminary feedback this week was mixed. On Monday, the City Council seemed amenable to Donovan’s first two requests but balked at the request for four floors.

“We all just ran for election and overwhelmingly the people I spoke to told me they did not want four stories on Main Street,” said Council Member Jodi McCredo. “If I now approve a building with four stories on Main, I am not representing my constituents the way that I promised I would.”

Council Member Terry Nelson said he agreed with McCredo, but both indicated they would consider a fourth floor with a setback in exchange for trade-offs.

If the council won’t grant a fourth floor without a setback, Donovan said he could build a three-story building without the public benefits, or not build at all.

On Tuesday, however, members of the Planning Board seemed more willing to entertain a four-story building along that stretch of Main.

“If the historic building adjacent to the proposed development is not stepped back, as long as the new development maintains that height, I don’t know why we would expect a setback,” said Board Member David Burke.

The decision will likely fall to the City Council, which on Monday, Dec. 16, is expected to name itself the lead agency to review the project’s environmental impacts, a job typically handled by the Planning Board.

The Planning Board could challenge the request but Chair John Gunn said Tuesday that it’s not likely to.


HOW WE REPORT
Trust MarkThe Current is a member of The Trust Project, a consortium of news outlets that has adopted standards to allow readers to more easily assess the credibility of their journalism. Our best practices, including our verification and correction policies, can be accessed here. Have a comment? A news tip? Spot an error? Email editor@highlandscurrent.org.

5 thoughts on “Three-Story Limit on Main?

  1. Building more housing in Beacon is an unquestionable good. If we want to keep Beacon affordable, we need enough housing to meet demand. Residents having meltdowns over 4-story buildings is a sad spectacle.

    There is nothing special about the City of Beacon that makes the economic laws of supply and demand not apply. The kneejerk, reactionary, NIMBYism from so many Beaconites (especially the newest transplants … like a certain newly elected city councilman), is what will cause the skyrocketing rents and destruction of what made them move to Beacon in the first place.

  2. Unfortunately, that cow left the barn long ago. When the three four-story buildings that now exist on Main were in the planning stages, I assume that the powers-that-be (Planning Board, City Council, et al) saw dollar signs … oh, so many dollar signs. As a result, the view of Mount Beacon — that symbol of the city and all it stands for — has been lost forever. Stand on the corner of Main and Cross Streets and take in the magnificent view of brick, mortar and glass.

    The developer proposes a four-story building with retail space on the ground floor. How many more businesses does Beacon need before it collapses under the weight of the promises of retail gold? How are people going to support all of these retail businesses, especially in that area of town, considering the parking crunch we are experiencing? How many more people are expected to re-locate to Beacon before the water, sewer, road and educational systems collapse?

    When the developer proposed a four-story unit, did he include the height of the ceilings for each floor? A four-story unit with 12-foot ceilings will be significantly higher than one with nine-foot ceilings. (As an aside, how many of the units in the building across from the post office are occupied?)

    It sounds as if the developer is playing on his home court: If I don’t get my way, I won’t include the public benefits, or I’ll take my ball and go home.

    Beacon has come a long way since I moved here in 1968. I am proud of this city, its development and its vision. But it is time to hit the brakes regarding the building boom that has taken place over the past few years. Like the stock market, there is going to be a correction, and the bubble will burst. Recall the recession of the 1980s and how that affected the economy: jobs were lost, businesses closed, and some people never recovered what they once possessed. Are we willing to put ourselves, as a city, in that position again?

  3. I’m all for progress — just make it affordable. I’m just not seeing the space to fit this proposal. [via Facebook]

  4. I can’t even manage to walk down Main Street on the weekend, and I live on Main! Don’t get me started with creative parking. [via Facebook]

  5. A park? Where will they put a park? We don’t need any more housing on Main Street. [via Facebook]