Adams Street developer pulls three-family request amid surprise property listing
Key Points
- Developer Frankie and Peter LLC withdraws application for a third unit at 400 Adams Street
- Property at 400 Adams Street listed for sale unexpectedly prior to the hearing
- Zoning Board grants withdrawal without prejudice following 1% lot coverage denial
- Board members coordinate Tuesday signing to finalize procedural withdrawal paperwork
A proposal to expand a two-family residence at 400 Adams Street came to an abrupt halt Thursday night as the developer withdrew the application following the property’s appearance on the real estate market. The Zoning Board of Appeals was scheduled to hear Application No. 2886 from Frankie and Peter LLC, which sought to add a third residential unit to a pre-existing non-conforming structure. The project had already faced significant hurdles, including an August denial letter citing that three-family dwellings are not permitted in the district and the proposed lot coverage exceeded town limits by 1%.
Attorney Marian McKetric, representing the applicant, informed the board that the manager of the LLC no longer wished to move forward with the expansion. I received notice of this, unfortunately, after the ad had been placed in the Milton Times,
McKetric said, citing personal and financial reasons for the reversal. The withdrawal aligns with a broader trend in Milton, where the Building Commissioner has signaled a stricter enforcement stance regarding the intensification of non-conforming properties, leading to a recent influx of similar denials reaching the board.
Chair Kathleen O'Donnell noted that the property’s status appeared to have changed outside of the hearing room. I did notice that there’s a 'for sale' sign on the property,
O'Donnell observed, prompting McKetric to describe the listing as unexpected.
While the board has recently shown sympathy for multi-generational living arrangements in other cases, they remain focused on the strict legal standards of variances and property line intrusions.
Motion Made by N. Gray to grant the request for withdrawal without prejudice. Motion Passed (3-0-0). Member Nicholas Gray, who has frequently advocated for modernization and strict adherence to land use statutes, confirmed he had no further questions before making the motion. Member Theodore Daiber seconded the motion, consistent with his practice of evaluating whether projects remain sensitive to the scope of local neighborhoods.
The meeting concluded with a brief discussion regarding the formal signing of the withdrawal document. While some members were ready to finalize the paperwork immediately, the board had to coordinate around travel schedules. I can come in tomorrow morning and sign it,
Gray offered, and Daiber noted, I can do that, too.
However, because O'Donnell would be out of state on Friday, the board reached a consensus to meet on Tuesday. McKetric agreed to the timeline, stating, Tuesday will definitely be for sure.