Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Quincy Planning Board continues Tobin Towers annex plan (80 Clay St.) after detailed review; project aims to add 94 affordable senior units

5090232 · June 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Board continued public review on June 25 for a major redevelopment proposal at 80 Clay Street: a seven‑story building behind the Quincy Housing Authority’s Tobin Towers that would add 94 one‑bedroom affordable housing units reserved for seniors (62+) and provide garage and surface parking shared with the existing tower.

The Planning Board continued public review on June 25 for a major redevelopment proposal at 80 Clay Street: a seven‑story building behind the Quincy Housing Authority’s Tobin Towers that would add 94 one‑bedroom affordable housing units reserved for seniors (62+) and provide garage and surface parking shared with the existing tower.

The proposal is a joint venture between Affordable Housing Services Collaborative (AHSC) and Peabody Properties; presentation team members included Michael Matos and Dan Angelo (AHSC), Betsy Collins (Peabody Properties), James Marathas (executive director, Quincy Housing Authority), and consultants from Weston & Sampson (civil/landscape/traffic) and TAT (architecture).

Key project facts presented to the board: - 94 one‑bedroom units, set aside for seniors 62 and older; 10% of units to be fully accessible. - Building height proposed at seven stories with 22 garage spaces on the first floor and 90 additional surface spaces (112 total) shared with existing Tobin Towers. - Unit affordability mix: 40 units at 30% AMI; 51 units at 60% AMI; 3 units at 80% AMI, according to project team statements during the hearing. - Building designed for passive‑house certification, Energy Star and Enterprise Green Communities standards; “solar ready” infrastructure will be installed for future solar panels. - Applicants intend local preference in initial lease‑up where permitted by state rules; AHSC/Peabody said they will request the maximum allowable local preference (up to 70%) for initial occupancy.

Technical presentations addressed site layout, circulation changes, stormwater management and traffic. Civil engineer Jesse Johnson described an L‑shaped building sited to preserve and regrade existing paved areas while placing parking partially within the first floor. He said the design aims to reduce impervious cover, tie into an underground infiltration system installed less than a decade ago, and improve drainage to address Wallaston flooding concerns. Landscape architect Jonathan Law described new pedestrian connections, rain gardens, a small green roof area and an amenity terrace for residents. Architect Jay Simanski described fully accessible units, community rooms, a roof terrace and measures to achieve energy performance targets.

Traffic engineer Doug Osler summarized a trip‑generation analysis showing modest peak‑hour trip increases. He noted the project was well under MEPA thresholds for major traffic studies and that transit access (within roughly a quarter‑mile of the Wollaston red‑line station and regional bus service) lowers vehicle demand. The study reported a small increase in peak‑hour delay at a nearby intersection but concluded the incremental effect of the project would be marginal.

Several residents and community members asked questions about visitor parking, noise, truck circulation, pedestrian crossings and sunlight/shadow impacts. Quincy Housing Authority executive director James Marathas described the multi‑year RFP process that led to AHSC/Peabody’s selection and said the Housing Authority supports the proposal; he also described housing‑choice and lease‑up practices intended to prioritize local residents where state rules allow.

Applicant representatives and city staff acknowledged the project requires additional review of drainage and coordination with peer reviewers and the Department of Public Works. The board continued the hearing to the August 6 meeting to allow peer review and departmental comments to be completed; the department recommended continuation to that date and peer review assignment was noted.