Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parsons Street Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Peabody conservation commission continues review of proposed two-house redevelopment at 20 Parsons Street after public concern
Summary
A notice of intent to remove an existing dwelling and build two houses at 20 Parsons Street was continued to July 30 after commissioners, city staff and neighbors raised concerns about density, floodplain overlap and potential rodents during excavation.
The Peabody City Conservation Commission continued a notice-of-intent application to July 30 after neighbors and the commission raised questions about density, impervious surface increases, riverfront and floodplain impacts and rodent control.
Attorney John Kelty, representing the applicant, described revisions to the plan filed in May that reduced the size of one proposed dwelling and added notation for tree retention and revised FEMA elevations. Kelty said the team had updated the plan to address commission comments and DEP feedback on new FEMA data. He asked the commission to issue an order of conditions, but commissioners and several neighbors asked for more review time and suggested possible peer review of wetland flags.
Neighbors at 27 Parsons Street and adjacent properties told the commission they were worried the application effectively changes a one-unit lot into two dwellings, could increase runoff and bring more traffic to a dead-end street. Marybeth Malia, 27 Parsons Street, said the proposal replaces a single-family home with two houses and asked whether grading and retaining-wall work would raise the yard and change drainage. Eddie Pereira, 2023 Parsons Street, and others raised concerns about rodents and parking.
Commissioners discussed riverfront redevelopment criteria and whether the proposed work showed measurable improvement of the resource areas. Commissioner Lucy (Lucia) [staff] reminded members that riverfront performance standards require a showing that redevelopment reduces impact or provides mitigation. Commissioner Bruce Komack and others discussed the conservancy-district boundary and granite-post markers intended to create a permanent no-disturb zone; some commissioners favored a post-and-rail fence as an additional barrier.
Several neighbors asked the commission to require a licensed pest-management plan before demolition if the site is infested; staff said the Board of Health requires an integrated pest-management plan when a building permit is sought. Commissioners also asked for clearer computations showing how removal of a pool and the smaller building footprint changed riverfront impact calculations.
Ward 2 Councilor Pete McGinn, who attended a prior site visit and watched the earlier hearings, urged the commission to let Commissioner Mike Rizzo, who was absent tonight, review the revised plans and comments from the site visit before a final decision.
The commission voted 5–0 to continue the matter to July 30 to allow further review, including possible peer review of wetland delineation and more detailed impact computations. The motion to continue was made by Secretary Michael Vivaldi and seconded by Commissioner Jamie Harrop.
