Hey, there! Log in / Register
Developer proposes eight houses on Hyde Park/Milton line; residents go: Yeah, right, pal
By adamg on Thu, 06/23/2016 - 3:37pm
Mike Ball reports on a meeting last night between a local developer who wants to put eight houses on a 2.1-acre vacant lot on Fairmount Hill - with a third of one house jutting into Milton - and neighbors of the lot. Residents fretted about the water table and where the coyotes would go when their habitat is turned into house lots. Also:
When one said it was their neighborhood, he reminded her it was his as well. She went on several levels deep, trying to trump him. She alleged to feel strongly because she’d grown up there. He came back with his nearly three decades in the immediate area, a long-term wife and three kids, arriving here to make his way when he was only 21, and so forth.
She played her final trump card. She had not only lived her 50 years, but had been born here, while he had not.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Classic
Classic nimby stupidity - it isn't actually about any quality of life issue at all - its about who thinks they have the best excuse/stupid idiotic "reason" to claim to own the whole goddamn neighborhood.
NIMBYs in Hyde Park?
NIMBYs in Hyde Park?
By Kyle Scott Clauss ...Zoning Board Intentionally Broke the Law
By Kyle Scott Clauss
AG: City’s Zoning Board Intentionally Broke the Law During Egleston Square Hearing
A state official says the ZBA gave insufficient public notice.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/06/02/boston-zoning-board-b...
Have any reputable Journalists looked at the advocacy of Boston City Councilors and Councilors' staffs' appearances/testimonies at Zoning Board Hearings?
See #7
9 things people always say at zoning hearings, illustrated by cats
As clearly explained by the
As clearly explained by the numerous commentators, the so called responses to to those arguments are hardly convincing in and of themselves.
Reminds me of a Simpsons episode...
Marge: Springfield doesn't want places like this.
Belle: I think I know what Springfield wants, sugar.
Marge: Oh? I've lived in this town for 37 years.
Belle: I've lived here 52 years.
Marge: I'm 3rd generation.
Belle: 6th.
Marge: Get out of my town!
8 houses, where does this guy
8 houses, where does this guy think he is, midtown Manhattan?
I've been here longer
This is the most annoying/stupidest argument I hear, and I hear it on a regular basis. Guess what, I don't care. I paid good money for my property, and my opinion is worth just as much as yours, regardless of how many years you've lived in the area.
I've anyways wondered
Do people who claim authority or privilege based on family's time in the area celebrate Columbus day?
Perfect site for a 40B
Perfect site for a 40B housing project, MJ dispensary, methadone clinic, trap shooting range, motocross course, toxic waste transfer station, and of course a world class heliport.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN! THEY NEED THOSE DIVERSE FACILITIES TO COMPETE IN A GLOBAL 21ST CENTURY ECONOMY!
You forgot ...
Halfway house/pre-release program!
Boston already has more
Boston already has more affordable housing than the state requires for a developer to use 40b. I mean, we need more, but 40b isn't relevant.
40b
The zoning enabling acts of the mass general laws do not apply to Boston at all as the city is fully exempted from them.
curious...
where this 2.1-acre vacant lot is... anybody have a map/know the street/cross-street/or general area?
If only there were a link...
That would show an image of the lot and the streets around it.
El Google
Try the map in the post. Its between Lochland and Prospect off Milton Avenue, on the north side of Milton.
The curb cut for the new street
would be opposite Farwell Ave.
For gods sake at one point
For gods sake at one point Boston was all farmland! Love Boston but I'm done living here.
White Bull
Oh, think on my favorite immigrant, the Anglican priest William Blackstone, the first non-Native American settler on the Shawmut peninsula. He rode his white bull (hated horses) along the flat of the three hills (hence Tremont) before Beacon Hill, before formal English settlement, and long before Boston. He had a Native lass as lover. He hybridized apples and was the model for Johnny Appleseed. He told the stupid, ignorant English types they picked a diseased swamp across the river and invited them to join in him what is not Boston where there was good water.
He got sick of them when they arrived and split for what is Rhode Island, long before that Williams chap. Blackstone (a.k.a. Blaxton) was the dude. He would not have tolerated such inane public meetings.
It sounds from the account
that the development meets the zoning for the area and can be built as of right. The Boston Conservation Commission can review the possible water issues.
I can't see any valid reason to oppose this, given the facts presented. It doesn't even have to go to the ZBA.
As of right, right?
Just so, and Keohane was only a little arrogant in noting that he didn't have to ask the association for anything. He'd gone through the BRA and the Public Improvement Commission (which controls adding new streets and hooking up to water and sewer lines and drains). Several in the crowd of maybe 50 just kept looking for something to force him to do something.
The way I saw it, if the water levels are OK, he can just go about doing his do. He tried to make nice with the locals. They as a group were indifferent or hostile. Meh. It was a Boston stereotype.
It looks like a nice piece of
It looks like a nice piece of woodland for the area. It's not necessarily good for an area to loose all those parcels, as much as transplants who are annoyed they didn't get to grow up in New ENgland and complain about their rents want to whine about anti building attitudes.
Sorry, but ...
Nobody is annoyed they didn't grow up in New England.
Plenty are, if they move here
Plenty are, if they move here, stay for a job or education and realize how much nicer it is than where they left, and then realize that it's much more expensive.
Nobody moves here ...
Not knowing this is one of the most expensive area in the country, except maybe toddlers moving with their parents.
People come here for college
People come here for college and decide to stay, and aren't really thinking about the cost of longer term housing at first. Not knowing the cost of housing wasn't really the point.
The point was a lot of people
The point was a lot of people come with short term plans. Even if they do consider housing beforehand, if they want to stay it's still a factor for transplants.
Millionaires and billionaires and baby
By the bye, this intersection of Hyde Park and Milton was the site of the mansions of Howard Johnson of the restaurants and Marcus Loew of MGM and the eponymous theaters fame. The Loew name appears on the courtyard of McMansions a short distance away down Brush Hill Road.
There's also a wonderful romantic tale behind the lot in question. A wealthy state rep bought it to build his dream house for his beloved bride. She died young, before the construction and the land has sat idle. His heirs are unloading the property. Maybe it's enchanted.
Michael Paul Feeney was a decent man.
The consummate State House deal maker who crafted Hyde Park's Stoney Brook Reservation. He was a big advocate of parks and open space. A "green" politician before its time.
The writer of that article
The writer of that article worked really hard to spin some sort of ethnic narrative into that article. It's a building hearing.
Irish Lives Matter
will be blocking a dead end in protest this afternoon.
It's not like affordable or
It's not like affordable or even reasonably priced housing is being proposed. The article says woodland would be turned into 8k square foot buildings.
Zoning Board penalty $1,000 & mandatory Open Meeting training.
Zoning Board penalty $1,000 & mandatory Open Meeting training.
May 27, 2016
OML 2016-69
http://www.oml.ago.state.ma.us/
Edward Coburn, Esq., Assistant Commissioner
Inspectional Services Legal Division
1010 Massachusetts Avenue 4th Floor
Boston MA 02108
RE: Open Meeting Law Complaint
http://www.oml.ago.state.ma.us/
Dear Attorney Cobum:
This office received a complaint from Collique Williams and Tara Venkatraman, dated December 15, 2015, alleging that the Boston Zoning Board of Appeals (the "Board") violated the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, §§ 18-25. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Board discussed a topic during its September 15, 2015 meeting that had not been listed on the meeting notice. The complaint was originally filed with the Board on October 14, 2015, and the Board responded by letter dated December 9, 2015.^1
http://www.mass.gov/ago/government-resources/open-meeting-law/open-meeti...
^1 We remind the Board that, unless an extension of time has been requested, a public body must, within 14 business days of receipt of an Open Meeting Law complaint, review the complaint, send a copy of the complaint to the Attorney General's Office, and notify the Attorney General's Office of any remedial action taken. G.L. C.30A, § 23(b); 940 CMR 29.05(5), (6).
http://www.mass.gov/ago/government-resources/open-meeting-law/940-cmr-29...
We appreciate the patience and cooperation of the parties while we reviewed this matter. Following our review, we find that the Board intentionally violated the Open Meeting Law as alleged. In reaching this determination, we reviewed the original complaint, the Board's response, and the request for review filed with our office. Additionally, we spoke with you by telephone on January 5, 2016 and with the complainants by telephone on January 13, 2016. Finally, we spoke with Boston Assistant Corporation Counsel Allyson Holmes on January 13, March 30, and April 6, 2016.
[recycle symbol]
FACTS
We find the facts as follows. The notice posting location for Boston public bodies is a bulletin board on the first floor of Boston City Hall. Boston has not adopted an alternative notice posting location, as it may choose to do pursuant 940 CMR 29.03(2)(b). During a July 21, 2015 hearing on a development at 3198-3204 Washington St. and 11 Iffley Road, the Board voted to continue the hearing until September 15, 2015.
The Board posted notice for its September 15, 2015 meeting directly to the City of Boston website. The date this notice was posted is not clear. The Board did not file the notice with the City Clerk, and no notice was posted to the City Hall bulletin board. The online notice for the meeting did not include a topic regarding requested zoning variances for 3198-3204 Washington St. and 11 Iffley Road. The Board updated the online notice on September 14, 2015, to include discussion of those two topics.
Immediately prior to the September 15, 2015 Board meeting, two representatives of a group called Group Working for 100% Real Affordability in Egleston (the "Group"), delivered a letter to each of the Board members and to the Board's executive director. The letter included a cover sheet stating, "To Chairperson Christine Araujo and the Zoning Board of Appeals IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ: Explanation why a vote on 3198-3204 Washington St and 11 Iffley Rd today would violate the Open Meeting Law." The letter included the following relevant portions:
We are writing to respectfully request that you postpone the vote on 3198-3204 Washington Street and 11 Iffley Road to another date, which we believe would keep the vote in compliance with the Open Meeting Law. Based on information from conversations with the Division of Open Government in the Attorney General's Office, we have determined that it would be a violation of the Open Meeting Law for the Zoning Board of Appeals to vote today on the projects.
...
The original agenda posted online from Friday, September 12, 2015 to Monday September 14, 2015 did not have [3198-3204 Washington Street and 11 Iffley Road] on the agenda.... [Open Meeting Law] requirements were not followed in posting public notice about 3198-3204 Washington Street and 11 Iffley Road....notice of today's meeting was not posted on the first floor of City Hall where notices of public meetings are posted.
Representatives of the Group attended the September 15, 2015 hearing. During public comment at the hearing on 3198-3204 Washington Street and 11 Iffley Road, a representative from the Group explained to the Board that it should not vote on the variance because the meeting violated the Open Meeting Law. During a recess, a Group representative again provided the Board Chair with a copy of the Group's letter. Despite the letter and the warning during public comment, the Board decided to continue with the meeting and voted to approve variances for projects at 3198-3204 Washington Street and 11 Iffley Road.
2
DISCUSSION
The Open Meeting Law requires that, "[e]xcept in an emergency.. .a public body shall post notice of every meeting at least 48 hours prior to such meeting, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays." G.L. c. 30A, § 20(b). The notice must be "printed in a legible, easily understandable format and shall contain the date, time and place of such meeting and a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting." Id. For meetings of a local public body, unless an alternative posting method has been adopted, the notice must be filed with the municipal clerk and posted in a manner conspicuously visible to the public at all hours in or on the municipal building in which the clerk's office is located. G.L. c. 30A, § 20(c); 940 CMR 29.03(2). As an alternative notice posting method, a municipality may choose to post notices to its website. 940 CMR 29.03(2)(b)a. However, the City of Boston has not adopted this alternative.
Here, the Board posted notice of its September 15, 2015 meeting on the City's website. However, the Board violated the Open Meeting Law by failing to file a notice for its September 15, 2015 meeting with the City Clerk and by holding a meeting for which the legally required notice had not been published. See G.L. c. 30A, § 20(b); OML 2014-153; OML 2013-55; OML 2011-32. The Board did so despite having received clear warning immediately prior to and during the meeting that the meeting had not been properly noticed.
http://www.oml.ago.state.ma.us/
Because the Board had been provided with written notice that the September 15, 2015 meeting had not been properly posted, we find that this violation of the Open Meeting Law was intentional. An intentional violation is an "act of omission by a public body or a member thereof, in knowing violation of the Open Meeting Law." 940 CMR 29.02. A violation is intentional where the public body has "acted with specific intent to violate the law [or] acted with deliberate indifference to the law's requirements." Id.
3
CONCLUSION
We find that Board discussed a topic during its September 15, 2015 meeting that was not included on the meeting notice. We find that this violation was intentional. We therefore refer this matter to a hearing pursuant to 940 CMR 29.07(3). We recommend the following orders be imposed:
(i) A civil penalty of $1,000;
(ii) Mandatory attendance by all Board members at an Open Meeting Law training conducted by the Division of Open Government; and
(iii) An order of immediate and future compliance with the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 3OA, §§ 18-25.
Please be advised that this letter does not resolve any other complaints that may be pending with this office or with the Board. We invite the Board to contact our office at (617) 963-2540 to discuss the hearing process.
Sincerely,
Kevin W. Manganaro, Assistant Attorney General
Division of Open Government
cc: Law Department, City of Boston
Collique Williams
Tara Venkatraman
This determination was issued pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, § 23(c). A public body or any member of a body aggrieved by a final order of the Attorney General may obtain judicial review through an action filed in Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, § 23(d). The complaint must be filed in Superior Court within twenty-one days of receipt of a final order.
4
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Office of the Attorney General
One Ashburton Place
Boston Massachusetts 02108
tel 617-727-2200
http://mass.gov/ago
Maura Healey, Attorney General
ENSE PETIT PLACIDAM SVB LIBERTATE QVIETEM
[ She seeks with the sword a quiet peace under liberty ]
[ Seal. Coat of Arms. hand, sword, shield, star, native north american, bow, arrow ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_of_Massachusetts
[ Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem. ]
[ This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty. ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ense_petit_placidam_sub_libertate_quietem
OML 2016-69
http://www.oml.ago.state.ma.us/
Oh, Don
You so FUNNY!
Oh, Don
With your incessant "editing" of your long posts to make them new again, you so FUNNY.
Oh, Don
With your huge ego stroked by people replying to your repeatedly "edited" posts, you so FUNNY.
For the record, a meeting between a developer and some neighbors is not subject to the open meeting law. Only when elected or other governmental officials get involved is it subject.
Oh, Don
You so FUNNY.
Sure, keep your non-sequitor up. I can add something every time you "edit" your post to make it seem "new."
Turning what little green
Turning what little green space is left into massive homes for a quick profit is hardly something that's going to help affordable housing, nor is that good for the area if it's keep getting repeated.
It's not something that is net plus to the area, it's just profit speculation and luxury houses at the expense of natural open space.
Water table??
Is this part of Hyde Park still using wells??
Nope
And neither does Milton.
I think that part of it is grasping for straws in an attempt to stop this project, but if it were a wetland area, environmental concerns could be an issue.
Not for a long time
None of Hyde Park uses wells. The twisted tales of the reservoir and the Hyde Park Water Company pepper the likes of the Boston Daily Globe. You can research that that the current Boston Globe archives (fee to retrieve if you aren't a subscriber), the BPL and particularly the top floor Hyde Park archives at the local branch.
Mayor Curley tried unsuccessfully to clean up the mess after allegations that the company cheated first Hyde Park and then Boston. A lawsuit ended up clearing the company.
Of particular interest is that Milton, Hyde Park and Boston used this as a backup reservoir. Then the foul tasting and smelling water was condemned by 1910. It seems the water was not circulated or aerated enough. Algae were big problems.
As an abutter, I hold the hope that either by turning the parcel into a park or through Keohane's development, the water control and mitigation efforts would lead to regular pumping and the lowering of the water table. I could be happy to do without a free ice skating pond if it meant less water in our basements.