Revere planning board grants consent to repeat ZBA filing for 28-unit project at 1822 Green Street

The Revere City Planning Board voted on Jan. 27 to grant the applicant consent to repeat its filing with the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for a planned unit development at 1822 Green Street, clearing the project to return to the next ZBA public hearing.

Attorney Joseph Cattogio, representing Churchill Development, told the board the proposal now calls for 28 one-bedroom units on two assembled house lots and described several changes made after an earlier denial: the building was set back about 5 feet from the street, floors were staggered to reduce massing and a 1,000-square-foot roof deck was added to increase open space. Cattogio said three units would be offered as affordable housing and that parking would total 20 spaces.

The vote followed debate over what constitutes a "material change" under the State Zoning Act, Chapter 48. Several board members and members of the public noted that an earlier site-plan application had at one time referenced 40 units; the applicant said that 40-unit plans were abandoned and that the operative submission to the ZBA had been a 29-unit application, now reduced to 28 units.

"We made material changes," Attorney Joseph Cattogio said, listing the 5-foot setback, the roof deck and the unit reduction as cumulative adjustments intended to respond to the ZBA denial and city concerns.

Proponent Amanda McGourty, who said she lives at 18 Green Street, spoke in favor of the project and highlighted its inclusion of affordable units and fit within the smart-growth overlay for that side of Green Street. "The addition of that affordable housing is something that I think is a notable consideration," McGourty said.

Board members questioned several operational details that the applicant said would be addressed at future review stages: trash pickup logistics, sidewalk installation (staff said sidewalk work will be coordinated through related projects and City Council permit conditions), and whether below-grade parking was viable given site conditions and a higher water table. Chair members noted recent FEMA map revisions removed much of the site from the 100-year floodplain but that a portion of the rear parcel remains within the floodplain.

During a roll call the board first heard a motion to deny consent, which did not carry. Board member Mr. Rivera then offered a substitute motion to grant consent conditioned on a revised letter to the ZBA that accurately states the prior submission (29 units) and identifies the reduction to 28 units as the material change; he asked the applicant to submit a written chronology of prior submissions. The board recorded affirmative votes from all members present; two members were absent. Chair announced the board would issue the revised letter so the applicant may proceed to the ZBA public hearing.

If the ZBA and then City Council grant the required special permit and approvals, additional conditions described during the meeting — including contributions to water and sewer improvements, a fire hydrant, and restrictions tied to the city resident-parking program that could limit car ownership for some tenants — would be memorialized at those hearings. The ZBA public hearing is the next scheduled procedural step for the project.

The planning board then moved on to its regular meeting items, confirmed the 2026 slate of officers and approved prior meeting minutes.