WARREN – Following months of contention, the town planning board voted 4-3 to deny a proposed mixed-use development that would require the demolition of two historic district buildings.
The residential and commercial development, proposed by Daniel Teodoro, owner of Waterdog Kitchen & Bar at 125 Water St., called for the razing of two buildings at 113 and 119 Water St., which Teodoro also owns.
On Feb. 27, representatives for Teodoro presented a master plan presentation for a three-story building containing 12 residential units and one commercial unit, with three, or 25%, of the residential units allocated for low and moderate income housing.
Local preservation advocates, including the Warren Preservation Society, Warren Heritage Foundation and Massasoit Historical Association, argued that demolishing the buildings, located in the town’s Waterfront Historic District, would disrupt the area’s character.
The project’s opponents also argued that the development did not include enough affordable units to make an impact on the town’s housing stock.
The development is “inappropriate to the prevailing scale, design and surface treatments of the predominantly 1 and 2-story buildings of the Warren Waterfront Historic District,” the the Warren Preservation Society stated on its website.
The proposed development also sparked the creation of citizen group Save Water Street. In addition to stopping the development, the group is pursuing rehabilitation of the historic buildings.
Representatives for Teodoro argued that 119 Water St. in particular had been condemned as unsafe, and required repairs that were not financially feasible. A valuation by J2Construct, submitted with the master plan, estimated that needed repairs to the 119 Water St. parcel would cost $931 million.
“This is a condemned, uncontributing tenement home that is unsafe for the general public,” said Eric N. Zuena, principal and founder of ZDS Architecture & Interior Design, the firm overseeing the proposed development.
Zuena went on to call the buildings “dilapidated, condemned properties,” with “nothing there worth repairing.”
But Planning Board chairperson Frederick D. Massie said the applicant did not submit adequate evidence that the structure at 113 Water St. meets hardship requirements, stating that the building is smaller and appears less damaged in photos.
Massie also said that the three low and moderate income units the developer had committed to demonstrated “the very minimum of what you can do, and it doesn’t benefit the concept of affordable housing.”
Teodoro’s initial plans for the building presented a four-story building with 80% affordable units.
Massie stated that the proposed development is inconsistent with Warren’s preexisting affordable housing plan, adding that the town “has made significant progress in implementing that housing plan.”
That plan also says that the town “should retain existing historic housing an strengthen neighborhood identity,” Massie said. “This does neither.”
Teodoro’s representatives said that the developer had not secured the funding for more affordable units, but added that if the project receives local approval, “there’s possibility that the number of affordable units can increase” due to increased opportunities to secure more funding.
The meeting saw more than four hours of presentations and commentary before the board took its vote.
Under zoning ordinance laws, Teodoro has the option of appealing the decision to the state Housing Appeals Board.
Jacquelyn Voghel is a PBN staff writer. You may reach her at Voghel@PBN.com.
