Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Variance Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues hearing on 1 Frederick St. redevelopment to June 2 after design and parking revisions requested
Summary
The Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals continued review of a proposed eight‑unit conversion at 1 Frederick Street to June 2 after planning staff requested revised drawings clarifying parking, driveway widths and how the building will visually connect to Frederick Street.
The Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals voted to continue the application for 1 Frederick Street to its June 2 meeting, after city staff asked the applicant to provide revised plans clarifying parking, driveway dimensions, front-yard paving and architectural treatment of the Frederick Street façade.
Attorney Donald O’Neil represented the applicant and described a parcel assembled from three lots with roughly 101 feet of combined frontage across Frederick and Henchman streets. The owner previously poured a foundation after applying for a three-family building; the current proposal would alter that work into an eight-unit building with 10 on-site parking spaces instead of the 16 spaces required by city rules.
Michelle Smith of the Planning Division told the board the proposal requires two variances (minimum frontage relief and parking count) and a special permit to modify parking/layout/dimensional requirements. Staff flagged several items for revision before final action: the percentage of front-yard paving (staff noted it appears over the 50% threshold), a narrowed driveway pinch point where the two-way aisle measures below the 20-foot standard, and a lack of a clear pedestrian entry on Frederick Street. Smith said staff recommended enhanced landscaping, bike storage, driveway signage at the narrowing, and more decorative architectural elements such as siding shakes or brackets to break up the facade.
Attorney O’Neil told the board the applicant is willing to reduce parking-space length, shift parking to increase landscaping buffers and add architectural detail. The applicant opposed a full common entrance on Frederick Street because, he said, that change would place a doorway into or adjacent to private bedrooms given the current unit layout; he offered instead to provide a walkway/steps to connect the Frederick Street sidewalk to a central building entrance. The applicant also agreed to provide the exact impervious-frontage percentage and to consider either decorative brackets or exposed rafter tails as facade details.
Board members expressed support for additional units in the neighborhood but asked the applicant to return with a revised plan showing the landscaping, adjusted parking geometry and a design approach to break up the Frederick Street facade. Board member comments emphasized the project sits in a managed-growth area and that staff’s preference for a stronger pedestrian connection was reasonable; several members suggested a continuation so the design team could present alternatives rather than imposing a required porch or entry design from the dais.
The board voted to continue the matter to June 2, 2025, and set the constructive grant deadline to June 24, 2025.
