Hey, there! Log in / Register

Mr. La Perle doesn't build his dream house

A Boston resident has spent the past decade battling his way through the permitting and approval process that would allow him to build his dream house on what is currently an empty lot on the flat of Beacon Hill.

But now, just after receiving the final sign-off on his plans, he's decided he doesn't want to, after all.

In 2003, Beacon Hill resident and Delta pilot George La Perle bought a piece of land at 45 Beaver Place, planning to build a two-family home on the lot, which in a previous life had housed a building used to store Metropolitan Park Commission (MDC / DCR) equipment. (This is the empty lot you see to the left as you're walking over the Arthur Fiedler Bridge toward Beacon Street from the Esplanade.)

He’s spent the ensuing decade working to get all the permits and approvals he needs before he can begin construction of his dream home. But, during that process, he's run up against strong opposition, both to the project – and to himself. In a Boston Globe Magazine article written in 2009, one of La Perle's neighbors said, "George is not known for his tact," while District City Councilor Mike Ross told him, "George, you're your own worst enemy."

At the same time, some of his neighbors and abutters to the project were themselves difficult to deal with by accounts. The community has always been deeply involved in everything that happens on the Hill and this was no different. Meetings were held, voices were raise, and multiple lawsuits were filed.

Due to the historic nature of the Beacon Hill neighborhood, there are severe restrictions on what can and cannot be built, which is why La Perle was required to meet with community groups including the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission and the Beacon Hill Civic Association, and with city boards including the Inspectional Services Deparment, the Zoning Board of Appeal, and the Boston Redevelopment Authority to discuss such issues as building height, floor-area ratios (FAR), architectural design, and shadow and parking studies.

Finally, on August 29th of this year, he received the last needed permit.

And now he's pulling out of the project.

According to the Boston Courant, after enduring all that he has, George La Perle has decided to move away without building anything, putting the land (and its approved permits) up for sale. (Final bids can be submitted by October 31st directly to Daniel C. Hill of Charlestown, La Perle's attorney.)

The price: $2,850,000, or best offer.

Would you spend ten years of your life working on a project such as this, and if you had, do you think you'd toss in the towel like he is, take your profit, and run, or would you see the construction through to completion?

Do you think the payoff was worth the effort? Did the city and neighborhood planning and development process work correctly, and effectively?

Above, an architect's rendering of what I believe to be the final, approved design, as found on the 45 Beaver Place website.

Disclosure: Yes, I'm a real estate broker but this wasn't an attempt to drum up business but rather an attempt to generate a conversation on whether this guy was gutsy or "naive" to put himself through all the trouble.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

I couldn't build a nice enough house to deal with them. I wish the North End poopers would spend more time in Beacon Hill.

up
Voting closed 0

Although it does, without question, take two to tango, all accounts suggest that Mr. La Perle went out of his way to antagonize and offend people. Not a very effective way to get what you want.

up
Voting closed 0

The chase is better than the catch.

up
Voting closed 0

Evidence of Mr. La Perle's concern for the well being of his fellow human:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349952/Dr...

up
Voting closed 0

Interesting. A lot of things make sense now. There were definitely times we met with him when some of the things he said made me think he was drunk. Maybe he was....

up
Voting closed 0

Wait a minute - a guy who was (is?) a first officer for Delta was trying to build a multi-million dollar home in Beacon Hill? Are we sure this is the same guy? If so, I need to either inherit some money or get into flight school asap.

up
Voting closed 0

Nope, it's definitely the same guy. He made no secret of the fact that he was a Delta Pilot. I, too, couldn't figure out how he was getting money for all of this.

up
Voting closed 0

How much he paid for the land and how much time he put into getting this far....

Is it worth 2.8m?

up
Voting closed 0

according to the Globe article.

Stories like this seem to abound on Beacon Hill and other places where you have a toxic combination of (sometimes) well intentioned desire to preserve the integrity of a historical neighborhood or natural area and residents with outlandishly deep pockets who are accustomed to getting their way.

I know this area well and it still boggles my mind that anyone would spend this kind of money to live within feet of Storrow Drive (and the Hatch Shell so you get to hear every concert, every Earthfest, etc.) on a street where it's still likely, even in this day and age, that you'll have to deal with your car windows getting smashed and prostitutes and their employers trysting in cars. Nuts.

up
Voting closed 0

"prostitutes and their employers trysting in cars"

That's why it's BEAVER Street. Duh.

up
Voting closed 0

...still looks like a photoshop to me...

up
Voting closed 0

I feel the exact same way about the South End!

up
Voting closed 0

Ah, Mr. La Perle. Getting that piece of property took an act of the State Legislature, if I recall. He then thought that it would be a good idea to ram a project down the throats of his (wealthy, nosy, NIMBY, well-connected) neighbors. While I'll agree that the neighbors quickly became unreasonable and hysterical (there's something about that part of the neighborhood, in my opinion, that lends itself to hysterics,) I also think that Mr. La Perle never missed an opportunity to shoot himself in the foot by ignoring common sense advice from people with experience. That's the main reason why this project took ten years to get permitted.

I assume that after a while the whole thing became a grudge match with the sole goal of getting the permits. Even if he had built the house, I'm not sure what it would have been like to live there. Do you think that he would be welcome in the neighborhood? I don't think so. I wouldn't put it past one of the neighbors to attempt to vandalize the property upon completion. Some of those fights got super nasty.

up
Voting closed 0

Ramming down throats? He wanted to build a house.

Seriously - what is with all this ramming imagery.

up
Voting closed 0

He wanted to build a house.

Maybe he wanted to build a house.

Maybe he wanted to permit the property and flip it.

Maybe he was just looking to annoy some people he didn't like.

Maybe he was looking for publicity.

I don't know what he wanted. How is it that you know?

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

He wanted to build a house without seeking any neighborhood input, sharing plans with neighbors, and basically doing what he damn well pleased. Like it or not, that's not how things work in that neighborhood, and Mr. La Perle ignored every bit of advice to work openly, and take things slowly. He caused many of his own problems.

That's not to say that what was finally proposed and approved was not an improvement over the empty lot that was there and not an enhancement to the neighborhood character, but by that point certain people in the neighborhood were so hysterical they were not thinking about the neighborhood.

up
Voting closed 0

You tell us, swirl. You're the one who seems to have picked up on some imagined sub-conscious desire by the poor guy.

up
Voting closed 0

Since much of this area is landfill, would a house built there require driving piles into the ground to support the structure? If so, this would surely annoy neighbors. It would also give lots of unhappy neighbors opportunity to sue for every crack in their walls and blame it on the pile driving. This is a good reason for not wanting to build, and just unload the money pit.

up
Voting closed 0

Nice article, thanks.

up
Voting closed 0

I think after all he went through the decision was based on not dealing with those neighbors. I don't blame him for not giving up on the process. Sometimes its worth fighting to make a point.

up
Voting closed 0

for fighting this abrasive, deliberately provocative, in-your-face putz every step of the way. Sometimes it's worth fighting to stop a brat from getting his way.

up
Voting closed 0

Maybe, but I would say that after a while the fight became less about the architecture and more about the personalities. I think both sides behaved like children.

up
Voting closed 0

I don't know this guy from Adam but spending millions of dollars and making someone jump through hoops for ten years to build what looks like a very decent building that fits in seamlessly with its neighbors is ridiculous. Abrasive putzes need to live somewhere too and there are already plenty of them on Beacon Hill. This isn't someone who wanted to raze a few 1820 townhouses to build a post-modern monstrosity.

up
Voting closed 0

Some guy just wants to catch a football and run 50 yards with it. And some other organization has gone to all the trouble of hiring, training, and recruiting an entire team of professional athletes to stand in his way, try to knock him down, and try to take the ball from him. Waaah, waaah, waah, what a bunch of meanies.

If you act like a neighbor, you'll be treated like a neighbor. If you make it into an adversarial contest, then the opposing team is going to use the rules of the game to try to stop you from getting your way. That's the way the game is played.

up
Voting closed 0

If you act like a neighbor, you'll be treated like a neighbor.

Ah, but is it really that simple? Sometimes it has more to do with "I've been here longer than you so you have to do what I say". I've seen that happen in wealthy and working class neighborhoods alike, where ever people confuse tribalism with citizenship. Being from South Boston, you should know that it isn't so simple as being a decent person to your neighbors. Some people will just hate you because you had the nerve not to have gone to high school with them.

up
Voting closed 0

And that is a large part of what happened here. Mr. La Perle didn't take the time to build relationships.

up
Voting closed 0

He wasn't joining a club, but trying to make reasonable use of his property. If he was building something within the zoning and published historic appearance guidelines, it wasn't any of anyone's business what he did with the property.

This sounds like Heathers, but with adults. Pathetic, really.

up
Voting closed 0

Believe me, at first he wasn't doing any of that. The final design was a result of years of wrangling.

up
Voting closed 0

Do you know if any earlier variations of his proposed design are available somewhere online? I'm curious what sort of monstrosity he initially tried to foist upon the neighbors.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm sure that earlier iterations of that building have been filed with the city, so they're a public record. I'm not aware of anything online (but I also have not looked.)

up
Voting closed 0

To see some of the paperwork filed at City Hall by the owner of 45 Beaver Street, go to http://www.cityofboston.gov/isd/permitsearch/defau.... Records prior to 2009 are in PDF form while the latter ones are web format.

up
Voting closed 0

If he had been trying to build something within the existing zoning and land use laws, then he would have encountered no obstacles. The points at which the neighobrs opposed him were the points where he was applying for variances and special exceptions of various sorts.

up
Voting closed 0

I never understood the neighbors' objections to a well-designed, contextual building instead of an empty lot. Besides the community relations issue, which, yes, Mr. La Perle f'ed up horribly, my thought was that somebody over there lost out on the chance to buy the property because La Perle was quicker. The vehemency with which the neighbors objected did not match the issue.

up
Voting closed 0

In a neighborhood like that, nothing's ever that simple. You're going to have to face all kinds of city boards and neighborhood groups, no matter what you try to build.

up
Voting closed 0

Again--I don't know this guy. But I lived in that nabe for most of my life and your football analogy just makes no sense whatsoever. His naïveté in thinking he could actually build anything there without running into crazed and insanely well-financed opposition from neighbors who don't want their July 4th views blocked is astounding.

up
Voting closed 0

I don't dispute your assessment of the opposition, but I believe there's a world of difference between, on the one hand, the intensity of people's opposition to new construction that in their eyes worsens the neighborhood, and, on the other, their opposition to the same new construction, as proposed by someone who made it clear from the beginning that he was going to be really personally unpleasant. In the first case you're keeping out a house you don't like; in the second case you're keeping out an awful neighbor.

up
Voting closed 0

Did you bother to read the Globe article linked above?

It sounds like the neighbors were problematic from the start. Here's a quote from the article:

"Others blame a gaggle of ill-spirited neighbors for driving La Perle to distraction. “George is not a villain,” says Elise Hills, a Beacon Hill neighbor and friend of La Perle’s. She says the feud was started by some non-abutting neighbors who were upset about losing their views. It escalated when a group of them started showing up at public meetings where they “put down and belittled” La Perle. His opponents not only filed lawsuits, says Hills, some even began taunting La Perle in social settings as well. “He’s just a person chasing the American dream. I can’t believe what he endures on a daily basis because of this.”

I would be angry, too, if I were treated like that.

up
Voting closed 0

Obviously, there is another.

up
Voting closed 0

We need that space for a bike rack.

up
Voting closed 0

Just a few feet away.

up
Voting closed 0

Hopefully Bank of America will purchase it and put in a branch. We need more of those.

up
Voting closed 0

How about another poop filled dog park?

up
Voting closed 0

Poop Park?

up
Voting closed 0

With a fountain.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

The location is more Storrow Drive than Beacon Hill. I'd venture that it might just be the worst lot in the neighborhood.
Great views of a pedestrian overpass and a roadway.

up
Voting closed 0

1. Buy Seaport property
2. Battle for zoning increases and tax breaks
3. Sell the [still undeveloped] property for more than you purchased it for
4. ???
5. PROFIT!

up
Voting closed 0

I grew up next door at 39 Beaver Place (now 37 and 41). The wall that's cinderblock used to be part of our our house. Had some nice windows in it that could see the sunset down Storrow Drive. The houses on Beaver Place mostly have party walls with the Chestnut St. buildings so there's only the front that actually open to the land or street. It gets finessed by skylights and roof decks and I think his original plan kind of blocked the views and light. The neighborhood has changed a bit since I was there but that corner is a sore thumb and I suspect that someone a bit more conciliatory and patient could have gotten something nice built there fairly easily.

up
Voting closed 0

That house actually looks like a great infill development, certainly better than having an empty pit there. It sounds like the purchase price includes permits and the design, so hopefully someone jumps on this and gets it built.

up
Voting closed 0

Sounds like Mr. La Perle might have some other "issues" other than real estate....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349952/Dr...

up
Voting closed 0

with the house that Todd English bought, gutted and then seemingly abandoned? New owners? Progress?

up
Voting closed 0

You'd need to be Gandhi to build relationships on Beacon Hill. The Civic Association is populated by fusty, no can do types who care more about getting more cupcake shops on Charles Street than improving the neighborhood. They fight about any sort of advance, they chase away new businesses (coffee shop on by the state house, Jacob Wirth on Cambridge St. They fight for dumb things like tree protectors that get used as trash bins and bike racks. Woe betide the person who wants to improve a property. If it doesn't perfectly match the committee spec, forget it. These people are unelected!

up
Voting closed 0

The building is a little out of character from neighboring buildings but I think it would have been a great addition to the area.

From the 2009 Globe article:
"Opponents say his planned building will destroy the historic character of the neighborhood (as they allege in their most recent lawsuit), ruin their views of the Esplanade, and cast a new afternoon shadow on their roof decks."

up
Voting closed 0