Neighbors OK Sandler Reuse; Zoning Not So Sure

Most neighbors of the former are enthusiastic about a development plan that they say will transform the long-neglected property that has been an eyesore in east Belmont for longer than they care to remember.

However, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Belmont Planning Board have reservations about the proposed plan for the location.

Those concerns are serious enough, in fact, that a joint public hearing lasting about 90 minutes on Monday, June 6, to grant a special permit to owner Robert Orfaly for the long abandoned site at 58-60 and 70 Concord Ave. was continued to Tuesday, June 28 at 7:15 p.m. in the selectmen’s room of .

Orfaly and his team are seeking a special permit to maintain the nonconforming rear setback for a one-story retail park where they propose to reconfigure six parking spaces and construct an addition to the existing structure that would result in a building of approximately 8,934 square feet.

At issue for members of the two boards are traffic, parking, safety and landscape details.  They asked Orfaly and his development team to think about changes to the plan that would add trees to the front of the property on Concord Avenue; move parking spaces (to the back of the building) or re-configure them (from diagonal to parallel) to allow better landscaping and safety for vehicles and pedestrians; determine where they will put snow when it’s removed in the winter; and note dictates of the Planning Board’s parking requirements in their revised plan before the next joint public hearing in three weeks.

added the team might also need a variance, or other zoning relief, to accommodate parking in the front of the property.

Too much traffic, too much parking in front

“I’m a little concerned that parking in the front yard almost completely dominates the site,” said Planning Board member Andres Rojas.

“By having parking solely in the front yard, I’m afraid of it being too commercial-looking for a gateway site in Belmont,” he said.

The team’s plan calls for only five trees in the front “which hardly qualifies as buffering,” he said. Moreover, Rojas pointed out the plan does not include landscaping on an interior sidewalk.

“I’m concerned about what all those cars will look like,” he said. “An L-shaped lot is the focus. Is that really the best design?”

Zoning Board of Appeals member Nicholas Iannuzzi expressed grave concerns about parking as well as traffic coming in and out of the retail park and how that will affect safety for other drivers and, especially, pedestrians.

In fact, Iannuzzi said, he thinks the team should have a traffic study conducted.

Trying to come up with best plan possible

All members of the team – including Orfaly, architect Hans Strauch of HDS Architecture and a Belmont resident, real estate broker Bill Dillon of Landmark Real estate in Belmont and Paul Finger, president of Paul Finger Associates landscape architects and civil engineers – spoke about the proposed project.

Orfaly said he is the owner of the most “run down” property in all of Belmont.

“Hopefully, we will change that,” he said.

Dillon said Orfaly is a life-long resident of the town who has renovated numerous properties including 911 Dalton St., 191 Common St. and 505 Pleasant St. Dillon added that he and members of the development team spent a lot of time speaking with neighbors and provided the boards with a copy of a petition several signed in support of the project.

Straunch and Finger described the project in greater detail, explaining it will be a one-story building for retail. Although they do not yet know if that will mean two or five tenants, they plan to create facades within the brick building for multiple entrances.

It will be a pedestrian-friendly retail village, they said, with room for residents to sit. The area will have attractive lighting fixtures and awnings to create attractive entrances to the retail operations.

If approved, Finger said, the development will result in less square footage than what is there now.

Majority of neighbors approve the proposed plan

Several neighbors and abutters to the property said the plan is reasonable and, in fact, an excellent design for the site.

Placing the parking area in the back will not work, a few said. They will be able to see the cars from their windows and are concerned about noise and fumes coming from the automobiles.

“This site has been an eyesore for so long,” said Haleh Armian of Stewart Terrace to members of the two boards.

“I encourage you to eliminate whatever barriers (currently exist) to expedite development of this building,” said Armian.