Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Worcester ZBA Continues 14 Emery Street Townhouse Plan After Neighbor Opposition
Summary
The Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals continued a proposal by Gold Star Builders to divide 14 Emery Street into four townhouse-style single‑family attached units after neighbors raised concerns about density, parking and site ledge.
The Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 15 continued a special-permit application from Gold Star Builders to divide 14 Emery Street into four townhouse-style single-family attached units and create four separate lots.
Attorney Donald O'Neil, representing Gold Star Builders, told the board the overall parcel has about 11,637–12,000 square feet and the requested relief from the RL‑7 zoning requirements would amount to roughly 363 square feet if treated as a single property. O'Neil said the developer needs four units to offset the added expense of blasting ledge on the site and that proposed dimensions otherwise meet or nearly meet ordinance requirements for frontage, setbacks and height.
Planning staff analyst Amy Bethley summarized the application and the zoning relief sought: special permits to allow single-family attached dwellings in an RL‑7 district, lot area relief (500 square feet for Lots 2 and 3, 100 square feet for Lot 4), and modifications to parking and driveway setback requirements tied to a 0‑lot‑line townhouse layout. Bethley also noted that La Chapelle Street is an unimproved private way and asked the applicant to clarify any construction activity that would affect it. She said the project will also require site plan approval from the planning board.
About a dozen neighbors spoke in opposition during public comment, citing narrow streets, lack of sidewalks, limited on‑street parking, safety for children, and concerns about blasting ledge and the neighborhood character. Steven Manna said the project would “ruin the character of our neighborhood.” Several residents pressed that a duplex or three‑unit building would better fit the block.
Board members repeatedly referenced the difficulty of fitting four units on the lot given the unimproved La Chapelle access and the ledge. Several members (including Board Member Campanella, Board Member Barnhagen and Board Member Torcono) said they were inclined to prefer three units or a duplex and asked the applicant to return with revised plans. Campanella offered a motion to continue so the applicant could consider reduced density or alternate layouts; the board voted unanimously to continue to the Oct. 6 meeting.
The board’s continuance gives the applicant time to provide revised site plans that address alternatives (three units or a duplex, improved architecture), clarify any intended use of La Chapelle Street during construction, and resolve driveway/parking layout and impervious coverage calculations.
Board action and next steps: the ZBA voted to continue the matter to Oct. 6 to allow the applicant to submit revised plans and documentation; the continuation passed by a unanimous roll-call vote.
