Northampton Planning Board reaffirms apartment project approval with vinyl fencing exception
A court-ordered reexamination found most waivers were properly granted, but the board discovered it had wrongly approved vinyl fencing that violates zoning rules.
NORTHAMPTON — The Planning Board has reaffirmed most of its 2025 approval of a 54-unit apartment building at Phillips Place and Hawley Street, following a court-ordered review that examined whether the board had properly granted project waivers. The review, conducted last Thursday, found that all waivers were legally granted except one: the building's vinyl fencing.
The reexamination stemmed from an appeal filed in Massachusetts Land Court by nine neighborhood residents who argued the board had approved waivers in a "cavalier" fashion. Land Court Chief Justice Gordon Piper had sent the board's original approval back for further review. The project, proposed by O'Connell Development Group of Holyoke, would add 54 apartment units to the corner across from the former St. John Cantius Church in Ward 3.
Reviewing each challenged element—including the building's facade and five-story height—the board determined that all but one either complied with zoning ordinances or had been legally granted waivers. Planning Board Vice Chair Chris Tait, acting as chair, explained that the board had granted a waiver for pedestrian door spacing that turned out to be unnecessary. A closer reading of the zoning code showed that doors must be spaced no more than 50 feet apart, not that one is required every 50 feet. Since the building's existing doors were already less than 50 feet apart, no waiver was needed.
The one exception involved the building's vinyl fencing, which the board had approved without a waiver. Planning Board member Rich Baker said the board determined that a wood grain vinyl fence does not satisfy zoning requirements that fences be constructed with substantial natural material. The board found that it had not granted a waiver for this requirement.
Attorney Francisco Palomo, representing the plaintiffs, called the board's reinterpretation of the door spacing rule "amusing," saying the board was supposed to respond to its original interpretation rather than develop a new one. O'Connell Development Group President Sarah Stine said after the more than 90-minute review that she appreciated the board's time.