For the first time in years, forward movement is on the horizon for the McLean redevelopment.
But before that can happen, developers—in conjunction with the town and McLean Hospital—have revised a nearly 25-year-old traffic management agreement that will require ratification at the June town Meeting. On Monday night, the Select Board voted unanimously to accept the revised agreement despite objections from a handful of residents in the room.
“This is a development that I think we all want,” said Select Board Vice Chair Elizabeth Dionne. “A lot of time and thought has gone into it.
Select Board Chair Roy Epstein explained at a meeting earlier this month that the redevelopment, which is being undertaken by Jack Dawley of Northland Residential, began in 1999 when the town (Select Board) entered into an agreement with McLean Hospital, which sought to rezone the land for development.
As part of that agreement, 11 conditions were outlined, among them preserving a certain portion of the property as open space, conveying a certain portion of the property to Belmont for the development of affordable housing, and reimbursing the town up to $500,000 for consultant costs.
Another condition stipulated monitoring traffic to and from the property, limiting it to predetermined levels, and mitigating its effect on local roads.
In 1999, potential projects included residential development, a continuing care or senior living development, or some kind of hospital/institutional development. According to Epstein, a Traffic Management Mitigation Agreement (TMMA) was drawn up to manage the anticipated traffic those projects would generate, but over 25 years, “very little happened.” The Woodlands at Belmont Hill was developed; however, those townhouses were not covered by the TMMA.
In 2020, Town Meeting approved zoning that would allow up to 150 residential units in Zone 3, a Senior Living Subdistrict of the McLean district. Subdistrict A would include 40 age-restricted townhomes, of which 15% (six units) would be affordable to households with 80% area median income (AMI). Subdistrict B, then, would include 110 rental apartments with 53 age-restricted units and 57 non-age-restricted units. Of those, 20% (22 units) would be affordable to households with 80% AMI, and 5% (six units) would be affordable to households with 50% AMI.
“The principal access road for those units would be Olmsted Drive, which is the street that winds down the back of McLean Hill to Pleasant Street,” Epstein said. “The TMMA addresses traffic volumes on Olmsted Drive, but it wasn’t really focused on the type of development that the Dawley project actually is.”
Some intersections in the area have already been improved, and traffic patterns have changed in general since the agreement first went into effect.
Dawley said the outdated TMMA has been flagged by several capital sources over the last year or so, impeding progress on the project. With this amended agreement, he said, construction may be able to start as soon as late summer or early fall.
So, the town worked with Dawley, president and CEO of Northland Residential, and Steve Kidder of McLean Hospital on revising the agreement “to reflect current conditions.”
“In a nutshell, those conditions that originated 25 years ago for a different development are making it impossible for the Dawley project to proceed because his financing partners are not agreeable to an argument where there is an undefined and potentially unlimited financial liability for traffic exceeding thresholds developed 25 years ago,” Epstein said.
The changes aim to ensure that additional traffic coming down Olmsted Drive does not create safety hazards. If needed, McLean and Northland Residential have agreed to split the cost of a suitable signal at the intersection of Olmsted Drive and Pleasant Street, though the town would design it.
“We were expecting a lot of commuter traffic, whereas now we’re looking at residents of Belmont who we want to be here, who we want to be benefiting the businesses in Waverley Square,” said Select Board Vice Chair Elizabeth Dionne. “Also, traffic mitigation isn’t as much of a concern as safety. It strikes me that this is a better solution for the actual situation.”
Residents at the Select Board meeting this week, however, expressed concern for the revised agreement, noting in particular that it doesn’t address areas that presently draw major levels of traffic, such as McLean Street. Many residents attested to the fact that entering or exiting their South Cottage Street neighborhood is near impossible around 4 p.m. due to traffic congestion on Mill Street.
“It’s really appalling to me that there’s no consideration and no input from the public on this,” said Precinct 3 Town Meeting member Jolanta Eckert. “This is nothing against Zone 3, this really has to do with McLean Hospital being held accountable.”
She asked town officials to look into how the agreed-upon $690,000 for traffic signals was spent.
Another resident of South Cottage Road, Katherine Pendergast, argued that the revised agreement fails to address traffic mitigation responsibilities that the hospital agreed to in 1999 for future developments— a point contested by Town Engineer Glenn Clancy.
“I do understand the frustrations around traffic; I share them,” Dionne said. “They’re town-wide. I think given the compelling interest in having this project go forward, I feel compelled to support the amendment.”
