Back Bay Sun
Viewpoint: Big deal on Newbury Street by Sue Prindle
You may not have heard about the proposal for the former Ritz Garage on the Arlington-Berkeley block of Newbury Street. It may not seem like such a big deal, really—just a demolition of a notably unattractive building, to be replaced by an office building only ten feet taller than what is there now. Compared to the 500’ towers that are being proposed in other parts of town, that’s not much.
But it is a big deal. And this is why.
In 1980, Newbury Street was rezoned to a height of 65’. (Before that, the height limit had been 90’, which is why you will see some taller buildings.) The reason the zoning height was reduced there and in the residential district was to provide sunlight and scale and openness to the sidewalks and the surrounding buildings—all the components that make up a pleasant living—and walking and sitting and shopping--environment. Sidewalk cafes sprang up like mushrooms. Pedestrian traffic on a sunny Saturday afternoon...well, you’ve seen it. Real estate prices on the street have gone through the roof.
Now comes Newbury Garage Associates, who feel that their new building should be 20’ higher than the legal 65 foot height. (20/65 = almost a third higher, if my math is correct.) There is no hardship that would justify such a huge variance—they just want it. The garage building they own, though architecturally undistinguished, is not in disrepair. In fact, it is still open and functioning.
Unfortunately, the BRA, our city’s planning agency, would like to see it approved.
This would be the first significant height variance allowed in the Back Bay Historic District in over 25 years. If it is granted, you can count on it setting off a chain reaction that will be hard to stop. Because developers always wants more space. More space equals more money. And if you don’t live here, the loss of sunlight and air and scale, the skyrocketing prices caused by speculation, and the disruption caused by constant construction don’t really bother you.
But for many of us who do live here, it does matter. It matters a lot.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Park in the Garage!
Charlestown Bridge
Representatives for Mezzo Design Lofts appeared before the Charlestown Neighborhood Council last week to outline steps they are taking to ensure that tenants use the development’s on-site garage.
The $54 million, 146-unit complex on Caldwell Street was developed by Boston-based Cathartes Private Investments in partnership with the Canyon Johnson Urban Fund, a private equity fund co-founded by former NBA legend Earvin “Magic” Johnson that provides financial backing for residential and commercial projects in urban areas. The development also includes an on-site garage with 187 parking spaces. Mezzo Design Lofts was forced to switch to rental apartments in November 2007 in the face of “a dismal condo market,” according to Cathartes senior project manager Mark Barer
Cathatrtes attorney Louis Miller said tenants from approximately 75 percent of the 44 units that have been rented so far have opted to use the garage.
Per the lease agreement, Miller also said tenants with cars are required to park in the garage. “Anyone who lives in [the development] and doesn’t park in the garage can be evicted,” he added.
Miller said abutters should notify the management office if Mezzo tenants are parking on the street.
In addition, Miller said the developer was in negotiations with Boston Transportation Department officials to prohibit the city from issuing resident parking stickers to Mezzo tenants, thereby ensuring that they must park in the garage.
Miler said free parking in the garage would also be provided to all visitors to the development.
CNC representative Mike Charbonnier was pleased that Cathartes representatives were on hand at the meeting to address community concerns.
“The most important thing is that they came before the community, which is what they should have done in the first place,” Charbonnier said during a phone interview Monday. “Residents of Brighton and Parker streets were interested to learn why the usage of parking and the building in general had changed. All developers should adhere to the community process and respect abutters and residents of Charlestown.”
Residents Criticize Allston Master Plan
Residents Criticize Allston Master Plan
Harvard Allston Task Force calls for more details from the University
Published On Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:05 AM
By NAN NI
Crimson Staff Writer
Harvard Crimson
Members of the Harvard Allston Task Force criticized the University’s master plan for expansion into the Boston neighborhood over the next 50 years for being too vague at a meeting last night.
The task force, which is comprised of mayor-appointed residents, distributed a letter that enumerated their objections and described the proposed plan as “a vague draft that fails to address community quality of life issues.”
The letter also called for improvements that include public transportation, constructive impact mitigation, and more open spaces.
“The master plan really doesn’t tell us a lot about what Harvard plans to do with Barry’s Corner or anything else,” Task Force chairman Ray Mellone said, referring to the intersection of North Harvard Street and Western Avenue, which Harvard plans to revitalize. “Nor does it tell us how they will ensure that the campus is not an isolated concept but part of the wider community.”
The city of Boston requires large institutions to submit an institutional master plan, a long-term proposal for extensive developments. Residents then have time to comment on the proposal before the institution is given approval for individual projects. The deadline for community comment is April 25.
Senior Project Manager for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) Gerald Autler said that residents bear part of the responsibility for ensuring that development proceeds according to their wishes.
“The more they know about what you want, the more in which they can know the parameters in which they can propose alternatives,” said Autler, whose agency is charged with overseeing development projects.
But several task force members said they felt that Harvard had ignored their suggestions in the past.
“At the end of the day, the real question is if any of this is going to do any good and if the BRA is going to go to bat for us,” Task Force member Brent Whelan said. “Are you guys interested in Harvard becoming a more responsible partner, or are we just going to deal with them the way they are?”
Autler said that the BRA would make sure that their needs were considered.
“We have regulatory power over them,” he said. “They’re not going to be able to do anything until we approve their plan.”
The University is expected to submit its final proposal—which will be accompanied by a community benefits package—in September.
No representatives from Harvard were present at yesterday’s meeting.
—Staff writer Nan Ni can be reached at nni@fas.harvard.edu
Harvard Allston Task Force calls for more details from the University
Published On Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:05 AM
By NAN NI
Crimson Staff Writer
Harvard Crimson
Members of the Harvard Allston Task Force criticized the University’s master plan for expansion into the Boston neighborhood over the next 50 years for being too vague at a meeting last night.
The task force, which is comprised of mayor-appointed residents, distributed a letter that enumerated their objections and described the proposed plan as “a vague draft that fails to address community quality of life issues.”
The letter also called for improvements that include public transportation, constructive impact mitigation, and more open spaces.
“The master plan really doesn’t tell us a lot about what Harvard plans to do with Barry’s Corner or anything else,” Task Force chairman Ray Mellone said, referring to the intersection of North Harvard Street and Western Avenue, which Harvard plans to revitalize. “Nor does it tell us how they will ensure that the campus is not an isolated concept but part of the wider community.”
The city of Boston requires large institutions to submit an institutional master plan, a long-term proposal for extensive developments. Residents then have time to comment on the proposal before the institution is given approval for individual projects. The deadline for community comment is April 25.
Senior Project Manager for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) Gerald Autler said that residents bear part of the responsibility for ensuring that development proceeds according to their wishes.
“The more they know about what you want, the more in which they can know the parameters in which they can propose alternatives,” said Autler, whose agency is charged with overseeing development projects.
But several task force members said they felt that Harvard had ignored their suggestions in the past.
“At the end of the day, the real question is if any of this is going to do any good and if the BRA is going to go to bat for us,” Task Force member Brent Whelan said. “Are you guys interested in Harvard becoming a more responsible partner, or are we just going to deal with them the way they are?”
Autler said that the BRA would make sure that their needs were considered.
“We have regulatory power over them,” he said. “They’re not going to be able to do anything until we approve their plan.”
The University is expected to submit its final proposal—which will be accompanied by a community benefits package—in September.
No representatives from Harvard were present at yesterday’s meeting.
—Staff writer Nan Ni can be reached at nni@fas.harvard.edu
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Harvard's Institutional Plann
Allston community planning workshop draws 50
By Keith Howard, Correspondent
Thu Apr 10, 2008, 11:23 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton -
Allston-Brighton - As the Harvard machine keeps growing, Allston-Brighton residents are gearing up for another tug-of-war to keep foot traffic on their streets and university students off their front doorsteps.
The Boston Redevelopment Association had the first of two workshops to hear feedback about Harvard’s Institutional Master Plan and the North Allston-Brighton Community-Wide Plan, which will build upon the guidelines set up by the 2005 North Allston Strategic Framework for Planning.
During the April 9 meeting at the Honan-Allston Library, the BRA gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining possible methods of expansion before an audience of more than 50 people. Afterwards, residents split into four different groups to brainstorm ideas on economic development, land use and new development, transportation and urban design.
“It was a meant to be a meeting to start a process that will help us as an entire neighborhood,” said Michael F. Glavin, deputy director for institutional development. “It’s pretty critical that we hear from the community about its priorities and needs.”
According to Glavin, the benefits set up by the recently signed cooperation agreement associated with Harvard’s science center are a good example of the critical advice the BRA is looking for within the community. “A lot of their input on the types of benefits that they thought were important are in this,” he said.
The Harvard Allston Task Force developed a cooperation agreement for a benefits package through a compromise with the city of Boston and Harvard University, which will be building a $1 billion science complex in north Allston.
Some of the benefits include $23.9 million to be distributed over 10 years; a partnership fund to distribute $500,000 in grants over five years to neighborhood programs; and another $500,000 for needs that will be assed in the future.
While Kairos Shen, the BRA’s director of planning, agreed that the issues raised in the cooperation agreement were important, he insisted that the North Allston Community-Wide Plan is an entirely new opportunity to do something truly unique.
“These [cooperation agreement] are very specific contributions that will be committed to when they sign,” he said. “In a sense the scope of that is much more narrow than [what] we are invested in today. We’re providing the larger context to provide for the future planning for this area.”
Neighborhood residents said this process should make a point to provide the type of services the community really needs, instead of setting up another chain of bookstores or coffee shops.
By Keith Howard, Correspondent
Thu Apr 10, 2008, 11:23 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton -
Allston-Brighton - As the Harvard machine keeps growing, Allston-Brighton residents are gearing up for another tug-of-war to keep foot traffic on their streets and university students off their front doorsteps.
The Boston Redevelopment Association had the first of two workshops to hear feedback about Harvard’s Institutional Master Plan and the North Allston-Brighton Community-Wide Plan, which will build upon the guidelines set up by the 2005 North Allston Strategic Framework for Planning.
During the April 9 meeting at the Honan-Allston Library, the BRA gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining possible methods of expansion before an audience of more than 50 people. Afterwards, residents split into four different groups to brainstorm ideas on economic development, land use and new development, transportation and urban design.
“It was a meant to be a meeting to start a process that will help us as an entire neighborhood,” said Michael F. Glavin, deputy director for institutional development. “It’s pretty critical that we hear from the community about its priorities and needs.”
According to Glavin, the benefits set up by the recently signed cooperation agreement associated with Harvard’s science center are a good example of the critical advice the BRA is looking for within the community. “A lot of their input on the types of benefits that they thought were important are in this,” he said.
The Harvard Allston Task Force developed a cooperation agreement for a benefits package through a compromise with the city of Boston and Harvard University, which will be building a $1 billion science complex in north Allston.
Some of the benefits include $23.9 million to be distributed over 10 years; a partnership fund to distribute $500,000 in grants over five years to neighborhood programs; and another $500,000 for needs that will be assed in the future.
While Kairos Shen, the BRA’s director of planning, agreed that the issues raised in the cooperation agreement were important, he insisted that the North Allston Community-Wide Plan is an entirely new opportunity to do something truly unique.
“These [cooperation agreement] are very specific contributions that will be committed to when they sign,” he said. “In a sense the scope of that is much more narrow than [what] we are invested in today. We’re providing the larger context to provide for the future planning for this area.”
Neighborhood residents said this process should make a point to provide the type of services the community really needs, instead of setting up another chain of bookstores or coffee shops.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Columbus Center Watch Part 2
Banker & Tradesman
MassHousing Withdraws Funding For Columbus Center
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter
Another state agency has abandoned Columbus Center.
MassHousing, the state’s affordable housing bank, has withdrawn $20.6 million in loan commitments for the controversial project that was to be built above the Massachusetts Turnpike in Boston’s South End.
The loans, pledged in 2006, would have been used to leverage 44 affordable condominiums in the mixed-use project near the turnpike entrance by Columbus and Arlington streets. But the loans were never issued.
MassHousing’s determination comes on the heels of the Patrick administration’s withdrawal of a $10 million Massachusetts Opportunity Relocation and Expansion Jobs Capital (MORE) grant for Columbus Center. The Boston Globe reported today that the state decided against funding the project after months of delays.
“At this point, based on the state withdrawing its MORE grant, we will not be able to proceed with our loan commitment,” said Thomas Farmer, a MassHousing spokesman.
Construction was expected to begin in 2005 for the $800 million air-rights project that would be built “in the air” on a deck over the highway and railroad tracks near the Back Bay MBTA station. When completed, the proposal would have included a 35-story glass tower and four 11-story buildings housing 451 condos, a 180-room hotel and a parking garage.
Funding problems have plagued the massive development as construction costs soared.
A state official said WinnDevelopment’s managing partner, Roger Cassin, has failed to demonstrate that his company had the financing to make the project a reality. “It began to look like a house of cards,” said the official, who did not have authorization to speak for the state. “Every funder has gotten cold feet and wants out.”
Cassin said he was unaware MassHousing had pulled its funding. He told Banker & Tradesman that he plans a meeting with public and private funders to the get the project back on track.
MassHousing Withdraws Funding For Columbus Center
By Thomas Grillo
Reporter
Another state agency has abandoned Columbus Center.
MassHousing, the state’s affordable housing bank, has withdrawn $20.6 million in loan commitments for the controversial project that was to be built above the Massachusetts Turnpike in Boston’s South End.
The loans, pledged in 2006, would have been used to leverage 44 affordable condominiums in the mixed-use project near the turnpike entrance by Columbus and Arlington streets. But the loans were never issued.
MassHousing’s determination comes on the heels of the Patrick administration’s withdrawal of a $10 million Massachusetts Opportunity Relocation and Expansion Jobs Capital (MORE) grant for Columbus Center. The Boston Globe reported today that the state decided against funding the project after months of delays.
“At this point, based on the state withdrawing its MORE grant, we will not be able to proceed with our loan commitment,” said Thomas Farmer, a MassHousing spokesman.
Construction was expected to begin in 2005 for the $800 million air-rights project that would be built “in the air” on a deck over the highway and railroad tracks near the Back Bay MBTA station. When completed, the proposal would have included a 35-story glass tower and four 11-story buildings housing 451 condos, a 180-room hotel and a parking garage.
Funding problems have plagued the massive development as construction costs soared.
A state official said WinnDevelopment’s managing partner, Roger Cassin, has failed to demonstrate that his company had the financing to make the project a reality. “It began to look like a house of cards,” said the official, who did not have authorization to speak for the state. “Every funder has gotten cold feet and wants out.”
Cassin said he was unaware MassHousing had pulled its funding. He told Banker & Tradesman that he plans a meeting with public and private funders to the get the project back on track.
The Columbus Center Watch
State pulls $10m slated for Columbus Center
Boston Globe
By Thomas C. Palmer Jr.
Globe Staff / April 8, 2008
In what may be the death knell for the problem-plagued Columbus Center project over the Massachusetts Turnpike, the state said yesterday it is withdrawing a $10 million grant the developers were counting on.
Though state funds are a relatively small portion of the overall financing, the developers contended that the $10 million - and a second $10 million grant they applied for - were crucial to making the project financially feasible.
Columbus Center developers received preliminary approval from state officials for the first $10 million, known as a MORE grant, last year, but the state did not act on the second request. MORE stands for Massachusetts Opportunity Relocation and Expansion Jobs Capital.
"The administration is redirecting those funds to other projects that will result in more immediate job growth and economic development," Kofi Jones, spokeswoman for the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development, said yesterday. "The developer can apply for funding in the future, but no commitments are being made," she added.
Construction on the $800 million hotel, residential condominiums, and retail project between the Back Bay and South End, which struggled through 11 years of permitting and vigorous opposition, has been on hold since last month.
The developers had not yet received any of the grant money, plus another $15 million loan from MassHousing, and asked Turnpike officials for permission to suspend work for up to 18 months, pending either approval of the funds or an improvement in the economic climate.
The request for the construction delay "triggered our decision" to withdraw the funds, Jones said.
But it remained in dispute yesterday which came first - the request to delay construction or the state's decision not to provide the $20 million.
"We needed to know how and when the funds that were previously committed to the project would kick in," said Alan Eisner, a spokesman for the developers, a team including the local firm WinnDevelopment and the California Public Employees' Retirement System and its investment advisers.
The project's estimated cost has zoomed from $350 million to $800 million since planning began in 1997.
Gregory P. Bialecki, state-permitting ombudsman, who was involved in negotiations, said the grant money was redirected in part because the developer could not guarantee it would start on the Columbus Center buildings soon after it finishes the deck over the roadway that will serve as the foundation.
"We asked them to demonstrate to us within the last 60 days it was really true that if the MORE money came through, everything else was all set," Bialecki said. "At a meeting, I was not persuaded."
In any case, the decision not to award the $10 million may spell the end for Columbus Center. That prospect - like the project itself - drew contrasting reactions yesterday."This is a shame," said David I. Begelfer, chief executive of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. "You have one of the better urban projects I've ever seen."
"Most any other city or state would be tripping over themselves to make this happen," he said. "To take the money away at the end is unconscionable."
However, state Representative Marty Walz, a Boston Democrat, was relieved Columbus Center would not receive public subsidies. "I'm delighted," she said. "I thought this was an inappropriate use of taxpayer money. If this developer can't or won't go forward, the process should start all over again."
Another critic of the state funding for the project, House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, said in a statement: "The Columbus Center project appears to be facing extreme financial difficulties . . . high-priced, luxury condominium projects of this kind should not benefit from state subsidies."
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority executive director Alan LeBovidge yesterday said the agency had recently reached a lease agreement with the developers to build the project on air rights over the Turnpike. But, before that lease could be finalized by Governor Deval Patrick, he heard back from the developers. "We got notified that they were stopping because of the MORE grants not being available," he said.
LeBovidge said the authority told the developers it was willing to negotiate a delay in construction of up to 18 months. But he also said he is concerned about what the developers will do in the interim, with an idle work site holding a substantial amount of equipment and materials.
"They've got to do something with all the things dug up, partial walls ripped down," LeBovidge said. "I don't want to leave it there for 18 months."
After a construction loan fell through last year, the developers decided to start work anyway, funding the construction on the deck with their own money, and even going so far as to give the Turnpike Authority a $270 million guarantee that it would be completed. Eisner said WinnDevelopment has already spent about $40 million on the project and the California pension fund has spent about $70 million.
Columbus Center was one of 23 projects that received preliminary approval for a total of $87.9 million dollars in job-creation grants. "This is the only one where the preliminary award has been redirected," Jones said.
Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.
© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.
Friday, April 4, 2008
More from Allston re: Harvard
Residents doubt Harvard community benefits plans
By Elana Zak, Correspondent
Thu Apr 03, 2008, 10:35 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - Residents expressed skepticism of the Boston Redevelopment Authority and Harvard University coming through on community benefits, such as community housing, this week at an additional Harvard-Allston community task force meeting to further discuss the Institutional Master Plan.
“What has happened to the community benefits?” said Allston resident Tom Lally at the task force’s meeting Wednesday, April 2. “How can we trust the BRA and Harvard for the new institutional master plan? We trusted you in November and December … I don’t want us to keep pushing that [community benefits] off.”
Community benefits could include things such as more restaurants, retail stores and community housing for the neighborhood. Lally said that he is still waiting for the benefits from Harvard’s new Science Complex. A presentation on community benefits was put on hold for next week due to time running out at last week’s task force meeting.
The extra meeting was planned so that the task force and others would be able to discuss and comment on the IMP. The BRA plans to collect residents’ questions and comments by April 25 in order to start creating its Scoping Determination, a document that tells Harvard what concerns it has to address in its final master plan, in May. Yet the residents’ and task force members’ underlying frustration continually came out at the meeting.
“Look at what Harvard has brought to the community so far,” said task force member Bruce Houghton. “They’ve devastated everything. … I don’t have trust.”
Task force Chairman Ray Mellone and Gerald Autler, senior project manager and planner for the BRA, both tried to keep the meeting on target. At the start of the meeting, Mellone stated the purpose of the additional meeting was to “figure out the critical issues.”
“We expect Harvard to be a full partner on a huge range of issues,” Autler said in reaction to residents’ dissatisfaction with the university. “I understand people’s frustration with Harvard. I didn’t want to spend this meeting talking about that.”
Worries about building height
Another concern brought up was the potential height of future Harvard buildings. Michael Hanlon, a task force member, said he did not want Western Avenue to become filled with incredibly tall buildings, creating a canyon effect.
“What’s important tonight is to tell us your thoughts about height. That’s a valuable comment,” said Michael Glavin of the BRA. “Those are things we need to ask Harvard to answer.”
By Elana Zak, Correspondent
Thu Apr 03, 2008, 10:35 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - Residents expressed skepticism of the Boston Redevelopment Authority and Harvard University coming through on community benefits, such as community housing, this week at an additional Harvard-Allston community task force meeting to further discuss the Institutional Master Plan.
“What has happened to the community benefits?” said Allston resident Tom Lally at the task force’s meeting Wednesday, April 2. “How can we trust the BRA and Harvard for the new institutional master plan? We trusted you in November and December … I don’t want us to keep pushing that [community benefits] off.”
Community benefits could include things such as more restaurants, retail stores and community housing for the neighborhood. Lally said that he is still waiting for the benefits from Harvard’s new Science Complex. A presentation on community benefits was put on hold for next week due to time running out at last week’s task force meeting.
The extra meeting was planned so that the task force and others would be able to discuss and comment on the IMP. The BRA plans to collect residents’ questions and comments by April 25 in order to start creating its Scoping Determination, a document that tells Harvard what concerns it has to address in its final master plan, in May. Yet the residents’ and task force members’ underlying frustration continually came out at the meeting.
“Look at what Harvard has brought to the community so far,” said task force member Bruce Houghton. “They’ve devastated everything. … I don’t have trust.”
Task force Chairman Ray Mellone and Gerald Autler, senior project manager and planner for the BRA, both tried to keep the meeting on target. At the start of the meeting, Mellone stated the purpose of the additional meeting was to “figure out the critical issues.”
“We expect Harvard to be a full partner on a huge range of issues,” Autler said in reaction to residents’ dissatisfaction with the university. “I understand people’s frustration with Harvard. I didn’t want to spend this meeting talking about that.”
Worries about building height
Another concern brought up was the potential height of future Harvard buildings. Michael Hanlon, a task force member, said he did not want Western Avenue to become filled with incredibly tall buildings, creating a canyon effect.
“What’s important tonight is to tell us your thoughts about height. That’s a valuable comment,” said Michael Glavin of the BRA. “Those are things we need to ask Harvard to answer.”
Is "No More Than Four" Legal?
Undergrad housing law to face court challenge
By David Golann, Correspondent
Wed Apr 02, 2008, 03:55 PM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - A new restriction limiting the number of college students who can rent housing together in Boston may soon be challenged in court.
In late 2007, the Boston City Council unanimously passed an amendment to the zoning code in order to prevent groups of five or more undergraduates from living in a single rental unit. The measure, intended to stem escalating home values and prevent rowdy “animal houses,” recently received final approval from the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Boston Zoning Commission.
Opponents of the new law now have a 30-day window in which to mount a legal challenge. Attorney Stephen Greenbaum is spearheading the main effort to prevent the law’s immediate enforcement and eventually invalidate it.
“We will be raising every single legal ground which we think is viable,” said Greenbaum. “We will seek a declaration from the court that the amendment is null and void.”
Greenbaum believes the new law violates several basic constitutional liberties, such as the rights to freedom of association and equal protection under the law. He also claims that the ordinance could not be enforced without violating students’ right to privacy.
“The city would have to ascertain students’ personal academic status in order to determine the legality of their living arrangements,” said Greenbaum. “Students are under no obligation to disclose that information.”
Many opponents of the amendment claim that it violates several specific Boston laws, including one banning rent control.
“Councilor Ross has repeatedly said that his intent is to reduce rents and reduce the value of buildings containing these units,” said Greenbaum. “So there is clearly a stated intent to create an illicit form of rent control.”
The TAB was not able to speak with parties involved in the case, and their names will not be revealed until their case is filed in court. Greenbaum did state that they constituted a “broad cross-section of people who will be affected by this change,” including student tenants, landlords and other stakeholders.
According to Skip Schloming of the Small Property Owners Association, many tenants and landlords are afraid to come forward and participate in the case. He said that Realtors and tenants participating in the lawsuit risk the loss of their livelihoods and housing if their activities are revealed to be illegal.
“No one wants to come out because everyone is afraid of being targeted,” said Schloming. “They want to use a landlord on the verge of retiring so if he gets targeted, that’s just his retirement.”
The future of this legal effort is uncertain, since most challenges to similar student housing-related laws have failed. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld occupancy restrictions on unrelated college students starting with the well-known 1974 case Belle Terre vs. Boraas. Several legal scholars agreed that this ruling is the largest obstacle to Greenbaum’s legal challenge.
“The case has been criticized, but it is still good law,” said Suffolk University Law Professor Renee Landers. “They have had opportunities to reconsider it, but they have not.”
“I feel that we are on solid legal footing,” said City Councilor Michael Ross, referring to the Belle Terre ruling. “I think that this is standard zoning, and similar zoning is in place across the country.”
“There is precedent for regulating the number of unrelated undergraduate students living together,” agreed City Councilor Mark Ciommo. “Cities like Philadelphia, Milwaukee, San Francisco, Salt Lake City and Boulder [Colorado] all have similar laws.”
Boston’s unique set of local laws leave the future of this particular case uncertain, however. One local real estate professional and lawyer, who prefers to remain anonymous, believed this law will be invalidated because it targets students more explicitly than the occupancy restrictions on the books in other college towns.
“It’s true that college students are not afforded the protections based on race and gender, but they are protected. Other similar housing laws that have been upheld do not specifically mention college students, but this one does,” said the lawyer. “I do not think the law will be upheld.”
The details of the case will become clearer when it is filed in either Suffolk Superior Court or the Massachusetts Land Court. The case will most likely be filed by a deadline in mid-April.
By David Golann, Correspondent
Wed Apr 02, 2008, 03:55 PM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - A new restriction limiting the number of college students who can rent housing together in Boston may soon be challenged in court.
In late 2007, the Boston City Council unanimously passed an amendment to the zoning code in order to prevent groups of five or more undergraduates from living in a single rental unit. The measure, intended to stem escalating home values and prevent rowdy “animal houses,” recently received final approval from the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Boston Zoning Commission.
Opponents of the new law now have a 30-day window in which to mount a legal challenge. Attorney Stephen Greenbaum is spearheading the main effort to prevent the law’s immediate enforcement and eventually invalidate it.
“We will be raising every single legal ground which we think is viable,” said Greenbaum. “We will seek a declaration from the court that the amendment is null and void.”
Greenbaum believes the new law violates several basic constitutional liberties, such as the rights to freedom of association and equal protection under the law. He also claims that the ordinance could not be enforced without violating students’ right to privacy.
“The city would have to ascertain students’ personal academic status in order to determine the legality of their living arrangements,” said Greenbaum. “Students are under no obligation to disclose that information.”
Many opponents of the amendment claim that it violates several specific Boston laws, including one banning rent control.
“Councilor Ross has repeatedly said that his intent is to reduce rents and reduce the value of buildings containing these units,” said Greenbaum. “So there is clearly a stated intent to create an illicit form of rent control.”
The TAB was not able to speak with parties involved in the case, and their names will not be revealed until their case is filed in court. Greenbaum did state that they constituted a “broad cross-section of people who will be affected by this change,” including student tenants, landlords and other stakeholders.
According to Skip Schloming of the Small Property Owners Association, many tenants and landlords are afraid to come forward and participate in the case. He said that Realtors and tenants participating in the lawsuit risk the loss of their livelihoods and housing if their activities are revealed to be illegal.
“No one wants to come out because everyone is afraid of being targeted,” said Schloming. “They want to use a landlord on the verge of retiring so if he gets targeted, that’s just his retirement.”
The future of this legal effort is uncertain, since most challenges to similar student housing-related laws have failed. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld occupancy restrictions on unrelated college students starting with the well-known 1974 case Belle Terre vs. Boraas. Several legal scholars agreed that this ruling is the largest obstacle to Greenbaum’s legal challenge.
“The case has been criticized, but it is still good law,” said Suffolk University Law Professor Renee Landers. “They have had opportunities to reconsider it, but they have not.”
“I feel that we are on solid legal footing,” said City Councilor Michael Ross, referring to the Belle Terre ruling. “I think that this is standard zoning, and similar zoning is in place across the country.”
“There is precedent for regulating the number of unrelated undergraduate students living together,” agreed City Councilor Mark Ciommo. “Cities like Philadelphia, Milwaukee, San Francisco, Salt Lake City and Boulder [Colorado] all have similar laws.”
Boston’s unique set of local laws leave the future of this particular case uncertain, however. One local real estate professional and lawyer, who prefers to remain anonymous, believed this law will be invalidated because it targets students more explicitly than the occupancy restrictions on the books in other college towns.
“It’s true that college students are not afforded the protections based on race and gender, but they are protected. Other similar housing laws that have been upheld do not specifically mention college students, but this one does,” said the lawyer. “I do not think the law will be upheld.”
The details of the case will become clearer when it is filed in either Suffolk Superior Court or the Massachusetts Land Court. The case will most likely be filed by a deadline in mid-April.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Mission Hill Concerned about Mrs. Jack's Will?
Critics fear expansion will alter museum's style
Increase in visitors necessitates $60m plan, Gardner staff says
Email|Print|Single Page| Text size – + By Thomas C. Palmer Jr.
Globe Staff / April 2, 2008
The plan for a new Piano-designed complex that would be built behind the existing museum was approved unanimously by the Boston Redevelopment Authority's board yesterday. It would contain a performance hall, educational space, a new entrance lobby, museum shop, cafe and kitchen, greenhouse, and other space.
While the Boston Preservation Alliance and a number of groups based in the Fenway neighborhood endorse the expansion, another organization, Friends of Historic Mission Hill, is asking the Boston Landmarks Commission to head off some of the proposed changes, saying they would violate instructions Gardner included in her will to preserve the original museum, which was built in the 15th-century Venetian palazzo style.
"It's like one of the 10 special buildings in the whole city," said Alison Pultinas, who has led the Mission Hill effort. "The intention of the property was a walled palace, monastic on the outside and palatial on the inside. We're concerned about the scale of the project, the authenticity of the museum experience, and changes to how people experience the Palace."
The proposed $60 million project includes a 60,000-square-foot glass addition and renovation of the fourth floor of the Palace, as the original Gardner is called. The new build ing would be about 50 feet from the existing main structure and 62 feet high, about the same as the Palace, and would connect to the main building through the garden.
The project would "create a building that is special in its own right, while respecting the unique nature and historic integrity of the Palace," the museum said in documents filed with the city.
The expansion is needed to accommodate visitors, which have increased to 200,000 a year, and to relieve overcrowded conditions that museum director Anne Hawley described to the BRA board yesterday. "We have people working in basements and closets," she said. "It's a nightmare, frankly."
One of Boston's most beloved and quirkiest institutions, the Palace was built around 1901 as a residence and museum, and features a flowering courtyard at its center and a collection of 2,500 objects that includes the first Matisse painting acquired by a museum in the United States. Eighteen years ago last month, thieves broke into the museum and stole 13 works of art - including three Rembrandts, a Vermeer, and a Manet - a crime that remains unsolved.
To make way for the new building, the Gardner would demolish a carriage house, annex, and part of a perimeter wall. The project would require relocating one work of art - a sarcophagus - as well as moving the main entrance from The Fenway to Evans Way.
Pultinas believes the changes, including demolition of the carriage house, may violate Gardner's will about preserving the property and the collection inside.
"Her will referred to the buildings, carriage house, and Palace," she said.
The Mission Hill group petitioned the Landmarks Commission in February to designate the Gardner complex as a landmark, which would significantly restrict what alterations could be made without commission approval. The Gardner agreed to participate in the commission's review of the project. A meeting is scheduled for next week where the commission will vote whether to give conceptual approval.
But Gardner's will also stipulates that the museum be maintained for public enjoyment, and officials believe the expansion is critical to fulfilling that obligation. The museum has submitted the project to the state attorney general for review, and will seek a ruling from probate court on whether the addition violates Gardner's will.
"We think, in the context of the overall purpose of Mrs. Gardner's will to create a museum for the education and enjoyment of the public forever, this is a very reasonable step to take," said Stephen W. Kidder, a lawyer for the museum.
The Fenway Alliance, a group of more than 20 institutions, said in a letter of support that the expansion "will be an ideal complement to Isabella Stewart Gardner's palace" and "will enable the museum to better preserve one of Boston's most treasured cultural resources."
Another supporter, the Boston Preservation Alliance, wrote that while the carriage house is "an interesting building," it "has never been part of the visitor experience."
Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.
Four Proposals for 1501 Commonwealth Avenue
Four developers make proposals for Commonwealth Avenue
Bullitan
Scott Wachtler 27.MAR.08
BRIGHTON — The city’s Department of Neighborhood Development hopes that the second time will be the charm for four new proposals to develop 1501 Commonwealth Ave. in Brighton.
Last year, the community rejected the four proposals shown on the basis that none of them were a good fit for the area.
John Feuerbach, a DND senior Development officer, unveiled the four new proposals last week to a sparsely attended community meeting held at the Jackson Mann Community Center.
Most of the audience was made up of developers ready to pitch their proposals, local politicians or their representatives and a handful of the regular cadre of Allston-Brighton community activists.
The meeting started a half hour late in hopes that more people would arrive.
"Sorry for the delay," Feuerbach said. "These are not the numbers of neighborhood representatives we were intending."
Feuerbach said the DND was committed to finding a developer that the community was comfortable with and if it took a couple of meetings to find that developer they were willing to hold more meetings.
The proposals came from the Allston Brighton CDC, B’nai B’rith Housing New England, the Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment and the New Atlantic Development Corp.
This was the second time The Allston Brighton CDC and B’nai B’rith Housing New England has made proposals for the development of the property.
All proposals accounted for mixed income units of either low-income, or market rate housing. The proposal from B’nai B’rith included units for middle income housing.
All units will be built to the United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards. All are rated in the Silver range of certification.
Each developer was given 15 minutes to pitch their proposal to and then given 10 minutes to answer questions from the audience.
The Allston-Brighton CDC drew upon their existing relationship with the Allston-Brighton Community. Their plan for the site is for a five-story building with four stories of housing and a one-story garage. Eight units are proposed for one bedroom, 23 units for two bedrooms and nine three bedrooms. Twenty-one units are set aside as affordable housing while 19 will be available at market rate.
Alex Selvig, a former candidate who ran last year for Allston Brighton’s City Council seat, commended the developers for including the most three bedroom units in their proposal.
"The three-bedroom units would help to bring families back to Allston-Brighton. I’m glad to see you’re committed to that," Selvig said.
Local activist Eva Webster was concerned that the plan didn’t include enough parking, but representatives from the Allston Brighton CDC said that the parking was standard for what the city asks.
B’nai B’rith Housing New England’s proposal relied heavily on their track record of developing mixed income housing and their highest ratio of parking spaces to bedrooms of all the proposals. They offer a five-story building with 39 one-bedroom units and 13 two-bedroom units. Twenty units would be set aside for low-income buyers, 15 for middle income buyers and 17 units would be offered at market rate. Representatives stressed that their proposal was the only one that included the middle income tier and that the building they proposed would draw on the architectural style of the buildings within the neighborhood.
Webster questioned the size of the bedrooms and questioned whether the apartments would be used for elderly housing — a complaint that was brought up at the last proposal meeting.
"These are small units," Webster said. "I get the feeling that you’re warehousing people and doing a disservice to the community by not being family friendly."
The proposed size of the one bedroom units are 700 square feet and the size of the two bedroom units are 850 square feet.
Harry Mattison, another local activist, worried that the units would be attractive to students. Representatives from B’nai B’rith said their experience with building similar housing at 33 Commonwealth in Newton hasn’t shown that to be the case.
Selvig questioned whether B’nai B’rith was truly committed to the community since the community tried to get the 33 Commonwealth Ave. building scaled down.
Representatives from B’nai B’rith said that they did listen to the community’s concerns about the building and did end up scaling the property down.
The next proposal came from the Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment. Their proposal centered on the beauty of the new building and even went so far as to name the property, Charing Cross, after a section of London.
"We wanted to do something nice to look out from, but also nice to look at," Merrill Diamond said.
Their proposal offered the highest percentage of market-rate units and offered the most parking. The six-story building would contain housing on four stories and two for a garage. They propose 49 two-bedroom units and eight one-bedroom units. Nineteen units would be set aside for affordable housing and 38 available for market rate housing.
The Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment proposal also included community benefits, such as money to clean the median in front of the building, money to upgrade the nearby park and an apprenticeship program during the construction. The proposal also includes a program that would set aside .33 percent of any sale to be used at the community’s discretion.
The New Atlantic Development Corp’s proposal focused on environmental sustainability and included the most ecologically friendly building. While most of the proposals included options for solar panels, New Atlantic’s, incorporated other sustainable options. Roof drains are designed to retain rainwater into collection tanks in order to water gardens and heat recovery ventilation systems that are efficient in minimizing energy use.
Four stories of the five-story building will be used for housing, while one story would be reserved for parking. They propose three, one-bedroom units, 39 two-bedroom units and eight three-bedroom units. Half of the units will be available as affordable housing while the other half will be sold at market rate. The proposal also includes the largest square footage per room of any of the other proposals.
Selvig said he was very impressed with the environmental sustainability of the proposal, while Webster said she felt the proposal was under-whelming for the area.
Another woman in the audience was worried whether the proposal’s new ideas would be a problem in the future when it comes to maintaining the property.
"There is no untried technology being put to use here," Peter Roth, president of New Atlantic Development Corp said. "The rainwater collection tanks would need to be drained in the winter and the solar panels would need to be cleaned from time to time."
After the meeting Selvig was positive about many of the proposals, but especially New Atlantic’s.
"I would love to live in a building like this," he said while looking over the buildings details. It would be great if we had more land sites available for development because it’s important that we find ways of bringing families back to the Allston Brighton area."
- The Bulletin Newspapers
Bullitan
Scott Wachtler 27.MAR.08
BRIGHTON — The city’s Department of Neighborhood Development hopes that the second time will be the charm for four new proposals to develop 1501 Commonwealth Ave. in Brighton.
Last year, the community rejected the four proposals shown on the basis that none of them were a good fit for the area.
John Feuerbach, a DND senior Development officer, unveiled the four new proposals last week to a sparsely attended community meeting held at the Jackson Mann Community Center.
Most of the audience was made up of developers ready to pitch their proposals, local politicians or their representatives and a handful of the regular cadre of Allston-Brighton community activists.
The meeting started a half hour late in hopes that more people would arrive.
"Sorry for the delay," Feuerbach said. "These are not the numbers of neighborhood representatives we were intending."
Feuerbach said the DND was committed to finding a developer that the community was comfortable with and if it took a couple of meetings to find that developer they were willing to hold more meetings.
The proposals came from the Allston Brighton CDC, B’nai B’rith Housing New England, the Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment and the New Atlantic Development Corp.
This was the second time The Allston Brighton CDC and B’nai B’rith Housing New England has made proposals for the development of the property.
All proposals accounted for mixed income units of either low-income, or market rate housing. The proposal from B’nai B’rith included units for middle income housing.
All units will be built to the United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards. All are rated in the Silver range of certification.
Each developer was given 15 minutes to pitch their proposal to and then given 10 minutes to answer questions from the audience.
The Allston-Brighton CDC drew upon their existing relationship with the Allston-Brighton Community. Their plan for the site is for a five-story building with four stories of housing and a one-story garage. Eight units are proposed for one bedroom, 23 units for two bedrooms and nine three bedrooms. Twenty-one units are set aside as affordable housing while 19 will be available at market rate.
Alex Selvig, a former candidate who ran last year for Allston Brighton’s City Council seat, commended the developers for including the most three bedroom units in their proposal.
"The three-bedroom units would help to bring families back to Allston-Brighton. I’m glad to see you’re committed to that," Selvig said.
Local activist Eva Webster was concerned that the plan didn’t include enough parking, but representatives from the Allston Brighton CDC said that the parking was standard for what the city asks.
B’nai B’rith Housing New England’s proposal relied heavily on their track record of developing mixed income housing and their highest ratio of parking spaces to bedrooms of all the proposals. They offer a five-story building with 39 one-bedroom units and 13 two-bedroom units. Twenty units would be set aside for low-income buyers, 15 for middle income buyers and 17 units would be offered at market rate. Representatives stressed that their proposal was the only one that included the middle income tier and that the building they proposed would draw on the architectural style of the buildings within the neighborhood.
Webster questioned the size of the bedrooms and questioned whether the apartments would be used for elderly housing — a complaint that was brought up at the last proposal meeting.
"These are small units," Webster said. "I get the feeling that you’re warehousing people and doing a disservice to the community by not being family friendly."
The proposed size of the one bedroom units are 700 square feet and the size of the two bedroom units are 850 square feet.
Harry Mattison, another local activist, worried that the units would be attractive to students. Representatives from B’nai B’rith said their experience with building similar housing at 33 Commonwealth in Newton hasn’t shown that to be the case.
Selvig questioned whether B’nai B’rith was truly committed to the community since the community tried to get the 33 Commonwealth Ave. building scaled down.
Representatives from B’nai B’rith said that they did listen to the community’s concerns about the building and did end up scaling the property down.
The next proposal came from the Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment. Their proposal centered on the beauty of the new building and even went so far as to name the property, Charing Cross, after a section of London.
"We wanted to do something nice to look out from, but also nice to look at," Merrill Diamond said.
Their proposal offered the highest percentage of market-rate units and offered the most parking. The six-story building would contain housing on four stories and two for a garage. They propose 49 two-bedroom units and eight one-bedroom units. Nineteen units would be set aside for affordable housing and 38 available for market rate housing.
The Brighton Partnership for Community Reinvestment proposal also included community benefits, such as money to clean the median in front of the building, money to upgrade the nearby park and an apprenticeship program during the construction. The proposal also includes a program that would set aside .33 percent of any sale to be used at the community’s discretion.
The New Atlantic Development Corp’s proposal focused on environmental sustainability and included the most ecologically friendly building. While most of the proposals included options for solar panels, New Atlantic’s, incorporated other sustainable options. Roof drains are designed to retain rainwater into collection tanks in order to water gardens and heat recovery ventilation systems that are efficient in minimizing energy use.
Four stories of the five-story building will be used for housing, while one story would be reserved for parking. They propose three, one-bedroom units, 39 two-bedroom units and eight three-bedroom units. Half of the units will be available as affordable housing while the other half will be sold at market rate. The proposal also includes the largest square footage per room of any of the other proposals.
Selvig said he was very impressed with the environmental sustainability of the proposal, while Webster said she felt the proposal was under-whelming for the area.
Another woman in the audience was worried whether the proposal’s new ideas would be a problem in the future when it comes to maintaining the property.
"There is no untried technology being put to use here," Peter Roth, president of New Atlantic Development Corp said. "The rainwater collection tanks would need to be drained in the winter and the solar panels would need to be cleaned from time to time."
After the meeting Selvig was positive about many of the proposals, but especially New Atlantic’s.
"I would love to live in a building like this," he said while looking over the buildings details. It would be great if we had more land sites available for development because it’s important that we find ways of bringing families back to the Allston Brighton area."
- The Bulletin Newspapers
"Unfriendly to Business" = "Vacancies on the Rise"
Where have all the stores gone?
West Roxbury Bullitan
Scott Wachtler 27.MAR.08
Centre Street vacancies on the rise
According to West Roxbury Main Streets, from the Holy Name Rotary on Centre Street to the Spring Street intersection with VFW Parkway, there are almost 20 retail vacancies inside West Roxbury’s business district.
Two more high profile closings happened after that list was compiled — Imagine That and Vintage restaurant.
In order to try to stem this spate of store closings, Kelly Tynan, executive director of West Roxbury Main Streets, held a public meeting last week to address the issue and get feedback from the community.
"The purpose of this meeting is not to look at the past, but to look at the future," Tynan said. "Right now we have numerous vacancies in the business district and we want to get your feedback on what we want to see West Roxbury look like in the coming years."
Tynan said that the economic slow down has hit West Roxbury and it will only get worse.
"We need to work on a plan before it gets worse and it will get worse," she said.
Tynan plans to work with local landlords in order to make them aware of the community's needs.
Main Streets is currently working on setting up meetings between landlords and community groups.
Despite Tynan’s desire to look for solutions for future prosperity, some in attendance felt West Roxbury’s reputation as being unfriendly to new business was one of the factors contributing to the vacancies.
A man who identified himself as a developer said that it is very difficult to do anything in West Roxbury.
"The impression out there is that we are not friendly to new businesses," he said. "Anybody who wants to invest their capital and come to our community should be allowed to open and be allowed to succeed and fail on their own merits."
He compared West Roxbury’s economic strength to Needham, but said that West Roxbury has fewer services. Others in the audience agreed.
"I can’t buy a set of sheets without going two towns over," one woman said.
Some placed blame on "entrenched groups" in the community that resist new business, especially when there are liquor licenses at stake.
"I don’t feel as though the West Roxbury Neighborhood Council reflects what I want to see in the neighborhood," a woman in the audience said.
Neighborhood Council Board member, Stephen Smith and Tynan encouraged everyone to be part of the neighborhood council by coming to meetings to show support for the businesses that the community wants to see, or serving on the Main Streets board.
Andy Dean, a member of Main Street’s Board of Directors, asked Smith what some of the council’s considerations are when evaluating new businesses.
"Parking, parking, parking," Smith said. "Something that meets the needs of the neighborhood. [We ask:] is it different than what we already have? We don’t want to see something that just duplicates what we already have."
Nick Anastasopulos, also a member of the Board of Directors, said that parking needs were overstated.
"I understand the parking issue, but I think it’s all relative to what your experience is," Anastasopulos said. "Parking may be congested on Centre Street, but if you compare what we have with an Inman Square where there are tons of cars on the streets, that’s a crunch."
Smith said that parking isn’t the only consideration, but it is a problem and there should be a balance.
In an interview after the meeting, both Tynan and Smith agreed that the neighborhood council is set up to be a reflection of the community.
"People should get involved," Tynan said. "People aren’t always familiar with the process and people need to be vocal about what they want."
As a result of the meeting, Tynan said that some people in the audience joined the Main Streets board.
Smith felt it was unfair to say that the neighborhood council wasn’t a reflection of the community.
"Our meetings are open to the public and they are the fourth Tuesday of every month and people just need to come out and show support if they feel strongly about something," Smith said.
Other comments from neighbors attending the meeting included the need for a boutique store to buy gifts, a family restaurant that you could bring a child to, bookstores and even a small knitting shop.
"There’s nothing to do after eating at a restaurant here," one woman commented. "We need more arts and crafts or arts center.
Tynan said according to a recent retail survey, it was found that residents wanted more ice cream stores. There will soon be three stores selling ice cream in West Roxbury. A Champs Ice Cream will be moving into 1723 Centre Street, replacing the L’Esssence Art Gallery that was closed due to last year’s fire. In addition, Real Deal will start selling Emack & Bolio’s ice cream in the near future.
Tynan called the meeting a step in the right direction and productive. She said West Roxbury Main Streets supports the community process and is working on changing the perception that West Roxbury is unfriendly to business.
"We’re here to help businesses though the community process," she said. "We need people to be vocal about how we’re a welcoming community. We need to get that perception out there and let businesses know."
- The Bulletin Newspapers
West Roxbury Bullitan
Scott Wachtler 27.MAR.08
Centre Street vacancies on the rise
According to West Roxbury Main Streets, from the Holy Name Rotary on Centre Street to the Spring Street intersection with VFW Parkway, there are almost 20 retail vacancies inside West Roxbury’s business district.
Two more high profile closings happened after that list was compiled — Imagine That and Vintage restaurant.
In order to try to stem this spate of store closings, Kelly Tynan, executive director of West Roxbury Main Streets, held a public meeting last week to address the issue and get feedback from the community.
"The purpose of this meeting is not to look at the past, but to look at the future," Tynan said. "Right now we have numerous vacancies in the business district and we want to get your feedback on what we want to see West Roxbury look like in the coming years."
Tynan said that the economic slow down has hit West Roxbury and it will only get worse.
"We need to work on a plan before it gets worse and it will get worse," she said.
Tynan plans to work with local landlords in order to make them aware of the community's needs.
Main Streets is currently working on setting up meetings between landlords and community groups.
Despite Tynan’s desire to look for solutions for future prosperity, some in attendance felt West Roxbury’s reputation as being unfriendly to new business was one of the factors contributing to the vacancies.
A man who identified himself as a developer said that it is very difficult to do anything in West Roxbury.
"The impression out there is that we are not friendly to new businesses," he said. "Anybody who wants to invest their capital and come to our community should be allowed to open and be allowed to succeed and fail on their own merits."
He compared West Roxbury’s economic strength to Needham, but said that West Roxbury has fewer services. Others in the audience agreed.
"I can’t buy a set of sheets without going two towns over," one woman said.
Some placed blame on "entrenched groups" in the community that resist new business, especially when there are liquor licenses at stake.
"I don’t feel as though the West Roxbury Neighborhood Council reflects what I want to see in the neighborhood," a woman in the audience said.
Neighborhood Council Board member, Stephen Smith and Tynan encouraged everyone to be part of the neighborhood council by coming to meetings to show support for the businesses that the community wants to see, or serving on the Main Streets board.
Andy Dean, a member of Main Street’s Board of Directors, asked Smith what some of the council’s considerations are when evaluating new businesses.
"Parking, parking, parking," Smith said. "Something that meets the needs of the neighborhood. [We ask:] is it different than what we already have? We don’t want to see something that just duplicates what we already have."
Nick Anastasopulos, also a member of the Board of Directors, said that parking needs were overstated.
"I understand the parking issue, but I think it’s all relative to what your experience is," Anastasopulos said. "Parking may be congested on Centre Street, but if you compare what we have with an Inman Square where there are tons of cars on the streets, that’s a crunch."
Smith said that parking isn’t the only consideration, but it is a problem and there should be a balance.
In an interview after the meeting, both Tynan and Smith agreed that the neighborhood council is set up to be a reflection of the community.
"People should get involved," Tynan said. "People aren’t always familiar with the process and people need to be vocal about what they want."
As a result of the meeting, Tynan said that some people in the audience joined the Main Streets board.
Smith felt it was unfair to say that the neighborhood council wasn’t a reflection of the community.
"Our meetings are open to the public and they are the fourth Tuesday of every month and people just need to come out and show support if they feel strongly about something," Smith said.
Other comments from neighbors attending the meeting included the need for a boutique store to buy gifts, a family restaurant that you could bring a child to, bookstores and even a small knitting shop.
"There’s nothing to do after eating at a restaurant here," one woman commented. "We need more arts and crafts or arts center.
Tynan said according to a recent retail survey, it was found that residents wanted more ice cream stores. There will soon be three stores selling ice cream in West Roxbury. A Champs Ice Cream will be moving into 1723 Centre Street, replacing the L’Esssence Art Gallery that was closed due to last year’s fire. In addition, Real Deal will start selling Emack & Bolio’s ice cream in the near future.
Tynan called the meeting a step in the right direction and productive. She said West Roxbury Main Streets supports the community process and is working on changing the perception that West Roxbury is unfriendly to business.
"We’re here to help businesses though the community process," she said. "We need people to be vocal about how we’re a welcoming community. We need to get that perception out there and let businesses know."
- The Bulletin Newspapers
Charlesview: Residents want more Space
Wanted: more space for Charlesview
By Susan Haverson, Correspondent
Wed Mar 26, 2008, 02:45 PM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - “Density and height are excessive for the Brighton Mills and Telford site” proposed for the new Charlesview housing complex, said A-B City Councilor Mark Ciommo. Although residents were reviewing a proposal to expand Charlesview from a 213-unit housing complex on 4.5 acres at 51 Stadium Way to a 400-unit mixed-income development on 6.9 acres at the new location, Ciommo pointed out that the current location is actually about 6.5 acres, when the parking lot and public ways are taken into account.
The net increase in acreage is approximately .4, rather than approximately 2.4, while the unit count would nearly double. Residents were already upset about the project’s density before this came to light.
Edward Kotomori, a neighbor, figured that Harvard University, which offered the new site being considered for Charlesview in exchange for the complex’s current site, would want the additional space at the old site. He wondered if the city, which owns that additional space, could give it to Harvard in return for more presently Harvard-owned land for Charlesview.
Another neighbor was concerned that people who could afford to buy housing units in the new complex would have more than one car apiece, and that there would not be enough parking spaces. “The neighborhood is too small,” he said, and “the street’s too small.”
“We’re bringing more people into the project, and adding no public transportation,” said resident David McNair, who is considering moving out of the area. He noted that the proposed site would not have access to one of the four bus routes, the 66, that services the current Charlesview location.
Willie Jones, project developer and Community Builders’ senior vice president, and Felicia Jacques, its director of development for the northeast region, said they need to move ahead with the project. “We have a clock we are now operating under,” that leads to occupancy within a few years, said Jones.
Jacques explained that time-limited legislation gave the Department of Housing and Urban Development the authority to transfer a Section 8 contract to a new location, which Charlesview needs to maintain the affordability of its units. HUD approved Charlesview’s proposal to maintain its current property, which has structural problems, while developing the new site in a certain time frame, so the present occupants can move to their new homes. Jacques said the tenants need good, safe housing, so Charlesview has to stick to the schedule that was approved.
“Our time frame is forever,” said Allston resident Karen Smith. “We’ll be living with it for a long, long time.”
Feedback wanted
The Project Notification Form is available on the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s Web site and at the neighborhood libraries. Comments can be sent to Jay Rourke, senior project manager, at the BRA, 1 City Hall Square, Boston, MA 02201 or e-mailed to Jay.Rourke.BRA@cityofboston.gov. He can also be reached at 617-918-4317. The comment period for the project ends on March 31.
The BRA’s scope, a document prepared in response to the proposal that will reflect the comments received about it, will be issued on April 25.
By Susan Haverson, Correspondent
Wed Mar 26, 2008, 02:45 PM EDT
Allston-Brighton TAB
Allston-Brighton - “Density and height are excessive for the Brighton Mills and Telford site” proposed for the new Charlesview housing complex, said A-B City Councilor Mark Ciommo. Although residents were reviewing a proposal to expand Charlesview from a 213-unit housing complex on 4.5 acres at 51 Stadium Way to a 400-unit mixed-income development on 6.9 acres at the new location, Ciommo pointed out that the current location is actually about 6.5 acres, when the parking lot and public ways are taken into account.
The net increase in acreage is approximately .4, rather than approximately 2.4, while the unit count would nearly double. Residents were already upset about the project’s density before this came to light.
Edward Kotomori, a neighbor, figured that Harvard University, which offered the new site being considered for Charlesview in exchange for the complex’s current site, would want the additional space at the old site. He wondered if the city, which owns that additional space, could give it to Harvard in return for more presently Harvard-owned land for Charlesview.
Another neighbor was concerned that people who could afford to buy housing units in the new complex would have more than one car apiece, and that there would not be enough parking spaces. “The neighborhood is too small,” he said, and “the street’s too small.”
“We’re bringing more people into the project, and adding no public transportation,” said resident David McNair, who is considering moving out of the area. He noted that the proposed site would not have access to one of the four bus routes, the 66, that services the current Charlesview location.
Willie Jones, project developer and Community Builders’ senior vice president, and Felicia Jacques, its director of development for the northeast region, said they need to move ahead with the project. “We have a clock we are now operating under,” that leads to occupancy within a few years, said Jones.
Jacques explained that time-limited legislation gave the Department of Housing and Urban Development the authority to transfer a Section 8 contract to a new location, which Charlesview needs to maintain the affordability of its units. HUD approved Charlesview’s proposal to maintain its current property, which has structural problems, while developing the new site in a certain time frame, so the present occupants can move to their new homes. Jacques said the tenants need good, safe housing, so Charlesview has to stick to the schedule that was approved.
“Our time frame is forever,” said Allston resident Karen Smith. “We’ll be living with it for a long, long time.”
Feedback wanted
The Project Notification Form is available on the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s Web site and at the neighborhood libraries. Comments can be sent to Jay Rourke, senior project manager, at the BRA, 1 City Hall Square, Boston, MA 02201 or e-mailed to Jay.Rourke.BRA@cityofboston.gov. He can also be reached at 617-918-4317. The comment period for the project ends on March 31.
The BRA’s scope, a document prepared in response to the proposal that will reflect the comments received about it, will be issued on April 25.
Harvard's Institutional Plan: Residents want more time
Residents want more time to comment on Harvard
By Elana Zak, Correspondent
Thu Mar 27, 2008, 11:37 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton - TAB
Allston-Brighton - The Boston Redevelopment Authority reassured Allston residents this week that their input is wanted regarding Harvard University; they will not be rushed in making decisions, said Gerald Autler, senior project manager and planner for the BRA.
“We do want your scoping,” Autler said at the Harvard-Allston community task force meeting Wednesday, March 26. “I don’t want to be in the position again of rushing to the community benefits process.”
The meeting marked the first time this year that the task force discussed Harvard’s Institutional Master Plan. The master plan is a detailed framework that shows how Harvard plans to expand in Allston over the next 50 years. The plan features no substantial changes from what was filed last year, but the task force, which had focused its discussions for the past months primarily on Harvard’s Science complex, is now beginning detailed discussion of the full plan.
Scoping is a process whereby residents and task force members send in their recommendations and a formal document listing these suggestions will be sent to Harvard. The idea is that Harvard will implement some of these changes into their master plan so that residents are happy with the changes being done in their neighborhood.
“What’s important is that Harvard gets the campus they want,” said Bruce Houghton, a task force member. “The campus is not for the benefit of the neighborhood.”
Some were not thrilled with the master plan presentation. Jake Carman, an Allston resident, expressed concern over how retail areas in the neighborhood would be developed. He also mentioned that he felt Harvard and the BRA were not listening to the residents.
“I don’t want to see Barry’s Corner turned into Harvard Square because there’s nothing there for me,” he said. “This is supposed to be a partnership. They should be listening to us.”
Task force member Brent Whelan expressed concern over the fact that he felt rushed to make recommendations after Autler said he wanted comments to be sent in by next month. Autler, however, said numerous times during the meeting that the scoping was the beginning of the process and there was no rush. Both BRA and Harvard officials stressed that the master plan is a work in progress and subject to change.
Another topic at the meeting was the formation of Citizens Advisory Committee. The CAC, which was suggested by the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office, would be composed of the existing Harvard-Allston Task Force as well as four other members appointed by the Ian Bowles, the secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. The committee would help Bowles assess Harvard’s submissions to MEPA.
“We’re looking at the bigger picture’s environmental impacts,” said Briony Angus, MEPA’s representative at the meeting. “We’re looking at traffic to storm water to air quality.”
Task force members seemed a little overwhelmed by the knowledge that they would be participating in yet another committee. While Angus could not say what the exact time commitment would be, she reassured the task force that they still had a lot of time before a CAC meeting would take place.
“My questions is, really, are you serious? We all have day jobs,” said Whelan, summing up many of the task force members’ feelings.
Feedback wanted
Comments on Harvard’s Institutional Master plan are due by April 25. Comments can be sent to Gerald Autler at Gerald.autler.bra@cityofboston.gov, or mailed to 1 City Hall Square, Boston, MA 02201.
By Elana Zak, Correspondent
Thu Mar 27, 2008, 11:37 AM EDT
Allston-Brighton - TAB
Allston-Brighton - The Boston Redevelopment Authority reassured Allston residents this week that their input is wanted regarding Harvard University; they will not be rushed in making decisions, said Gerald Autler, senior project manager and planner for the BRA.
“We do want your scoping,” Autler said at the Harvard-Allston community task force meeting Wednesday, March 26. “I don’t want to be in the position again of rushing to the community benefits process.”
The meeting marked the first time this year that the task force discussed Harvard’s Institutional Master Plan. The master plan is a detailed framework that shows how Harvard plans to expand in Allston over the next 50 years. The plan features no substantial changes from what was filed last year, but the task force, which had focused its discussions for the past months primarily on Harvard’s Science complex, is now beginning detailed discussion of the full plan.
Scoping is a process whereby residents and task force members send in their recommendations and a formal document listing these suggestions will be sent to Harvard. The idea is that Harvard will implement some of these changes into their master plan so that residents are happy with the changes being done in their neighborhood.
“What’s important is that Harvard gets the campus they want,” said Bruce Houghton, a task force member. “The campus is not for the benefit of the neighborhood.”
Some were not thrilled with the master plan presentation. Jake Carman, an Allston resident, expressed concern over how retail areas in the neighborhood would be developed. He also mentioned that he felt Harvard and the BRA were not listening to the residents.
“I don’t want to see Barry’s Corner turned into Harvard Square because there’s nothing there for me,” he said. “This is supposed to be a partnership. They should be listening to us.”
Task force member Brent Whelan expressed concern over the fact that he felt rushed to make recommendations after Autler said he wanted comments to be sent in by next month. Autler, however, said numerous times during the meeting that the scoping was the beginning of the process and there was no rush. Both BRA and Harvard officials stressed that the master plan is a work in progress and subject to change.
Another topic at the meeting was the formation of Citizens Advisory Committee. The CAC, which was suggested by the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act office, would be composed of the existing Harvard-Allston Task Force as well as four other members appointed by the Ian Bowles, the secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. The committee would help Bowles assess Harvard’s submissions to MEPA.
“We’re looking at the bigger picture’s environmental impacts,” said Briony Angus, MEPA’s representative at the meeting. “We’re looking at traffic to storm water to air quality.”
Task force members seemed a little overwhelmed by the knowledge that they would be participating in yet another committee. While Angus could not say what the exact time commitment would be, she reassured the task force that they still had a lot of time before a CAC meeting would take place.
“My questions is, really, are you serious? We all have day jobs,” said Whelan, summing up many of the task force members’ feelings.
Feedback wanted
Comments on Harvard’s Institutional Master plan are due by April 25. Comments can be sent to Gerald Autler at Gerald.autler.bra@cityofboston.gov, or mailed to 1 City Hall Square, Boston, MA 02201.
Don't Improve Traffic Signals on Beacon Hill?
Beacon Hill Times
Neighborhood leaders reject city’s argument for new traffic signals on Charles St. by Karen Cord Taylor
City transportation officials have a plan to install new traffic equipment at four Charles Street intersections, saying the intersections will be safer, the lights will be easier to repair and the change will bring the neighborhood into compliance with federal regulations.
But neighborhood leaders say the metal boxes that would control the equipment are too large, too ugly, and inappropriate for the oldest historic district in the commonwealth.
They also question the need for new signals, since they say they’ve never seen evidence that there is a safety or maintenance problem with the traffic lights along Charles Street.
“In the absence of data that show this is a safety issue or that the [current] lights are deficient, our committee will oppose this proposal,” said Steve Young of Chestnut Street, the chair of the traffic and parking committee for the Beacon Hill Civic Association, at last week’s hearing before the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission.
The city’s proposal involves replacing the traffic lights at the intersections of Chestnut, Mount Vernon, Pinckney and Revere streets with larger and brighter lenses run by computerized equipment that connects to city hall where transportation department officials can monitor traffic and control the timing of the lights, said John DeBenedictis, the Boston Transportation Department’s director of engineering.
The city would have to dig trenches across three streets at each intersection and another trench to the box at each intersection. The work would begin about a month after the city receives the go-ahead from the commission, if they are successful in obtaining that permission.
The new signals would replace outdated red and yellow combination walk signals with the new international standard that includes a countdown so pedestrians know how much time they have left in which to cross. At this point Boston has only 10 traffic signals remaining out of 800 that employ the red and yellow pedestrian signal, said Jim Gillooly, BTD’s deputy commissioner.
Charles Street’s traffic signals, which date from 1931 and 1952, according to city reports, are prone to breaking down, said DeBenedictis, and parts are increasingly hard to find. In addition, he said, the city must conform to federal standards that the old signals can’t meet.
Beacon Hill leaders don’t have problems with the larger traffic heads with bigger and brighter lenses nor with the concept of replacing the old electro-mechanical systems with newer computerized equipment.
It’s the system’s control boxes—42 inches tall, by 28 inches wide by 15 inches deep sitting on a 4-inch concrete base, according to DeBenedictis—that the civic association objects to, and the large boxes presented a problem for the commissioners as well at last week’s hearing.
“If you plant one of these on Charles Street, it’s going to come as a big surprise to everyone,” said Commissioner Ken Taylor. “These are crude artifacts.”
He also said something like this would never be allowed in a city like Paris, where leaders protected the city’s look as an important part of attracting tourists. “We can do better than this,” he said.
The chair of the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission was unimpressed with the city’s argument that maintaining the old traffic signal system in a way different from the rest of the city was a hardship. “The city accommodates the historic district in other ways,” said Joel Pierce of Garden Street. “For example, they maintain gas lights here that don’t exist in other neighborhoods.”
Steve Young disputed that the new traffic signals would contribute to safety. He said the new signals could have the opposite effect on Charles Street.
“Someone at city hall who wants to run a few more cars down Charles Street could make it less safe for pedestrians,” he said. “The potential for decreasing safety is significant. Retooling the electro-mechanical systems or replacing them with stop signs may well produce safer intersections.”
Moreover, he said, the large size of the boxes, which would be located on sidewalks, could create a hazard for the elderly or handicapped people.
Peter Thomson, who lives on Bellingham Place, said this proposal was no different from one that included large control boxes that was rejected by the architecture commission and the civic association in the late 1980s. Gillooly said there was a difference, in that this proposal has technology that wasn’t available 20 years ago.
Neighborhood leaders wondered why the boxes were so large. “In all other phases of modern society everything is growing smaller, but it traffic it seems that everything is getting bigger,” said Young.
“There is an awful lot of cable in there,” Gillooly explained. “Reducing the box in size isn’t as easy as you might think.”
The matter has yet to be concluded. The commissioners asked BTD officials to create a cardboard mockup of the boxes that could be taken around to each proposed location at each intersection so they could see how much of an intrusion the boxes would actually make.
Even if the city can show that the current lights cause problems of safety or maintenance, neighborhood leaders urged the city to go back to the drawing board. “In a historic district, there are different criteria,” said Thomson. “This plan shouldn’t get off the ground.”
Neighborhood leaders reject city’s argument for new traffic signals on Charles St. by Karen Cord Taylor
City transportation officials have a plan to install new traffic equipment at four Charles Street intersections, saying the intersections will be safer, the lights will be easier to repair and the change will bring the neighborhood into compliance with federal regulations.
But neighborhood leaders say the metal boxes that would control the equipment are too large, too ugly, and inappropriate for the oldest historic district in the commonwealth.
They also question the need for new signals, since they say they’ve never seen evidence that there is a safety or maintenance problem with the traffic lights along Charles Street.
“In the absence of data that show this is a safety issue or that the [current] lights are deficient, our committee will oppose this proposal,” said Steve Young of Chestnut Street, the chair of the traffic and parking committee for the Beacon Hill Civic Association, at last week’s hearing before the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission.
The city’s proposal involves replacing the traffic lights at the intersections of Chestnut, Mount Vernon, Pinckney and Revere streets with larger and brighter lenses run by computerized equipment that connects to city hall where transportation department officials can monitor traffic and control the timing of the lights, said John DeBenedictis, the Boston Transportation Department’s director of engineering.
The city would have to dig trenches across three streets at each intersection and another trench to the box at each intersection. The work would begin about a month after the city receives the go-ahead from the commission, if they are successful in obtaining that permission.
The new signals would replace outdated red and yellow combination walk signals with the new international standard that includes a countdown so pedestrians know how much time they have left in which to cross. At this point Boston has only 10 traffic signals remaining out of 800 that employ the red and yellow pedestrian signal, said Jim Gillooly, BTD’s deputy commissioner.
Charles Street’s traffic signals, which date from 1931 and 1952, according to city reports, are prone to breaking down, said DeBenedictis, and parts are increasingly hard to find. In addition, he said, the city must conform to federal standards that the old signals can’t meet.
Beacon Hill leaders don’t have problems with the larger traffic heads with bigger and brighter lenses nor with the concept of replacing the old electro-mechanical systems with newer computerized equipment.
It’s the system’s control boxes—42 inches tall, by 28 inches wide by 15 inches deep sitting on a 4-inch concrete base, according to DeBenedictis—that the civic association objects to, and the large boxes presented a problem for the commissioners as well at last week’s hearing.
“If you plant one of these on Charles Street, it’s going to come as a big surprise to everyone,” said Commissioner Ken Taylor. “These are crude artifacts.”
He also said something like this would never be allowed in a city like Paris, where leaders protected the city’s look as an important part of attracting tourists. “We can do better than this,” he said.
The chair of the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission was unimpressed with the city’s argument that maintaining the old traffic signal system in a way different from the rest of the city was a hardship. “The city accommodates the historic district in other ways,” said Joel Pierce of Garden Street. “For example, they maintain gas lights here that don’t exist in other neighborhoods.”
Steve Young disputed that the new traffic signals would contribute to safety. He said the new signals could have the opposite effect on Charles Street.
“Someone at city hall who wants to run a few more cars down Charles Street could make it less safe for pedestrians,” he said. “The potential for decreasing safety is significant. Retooling the electro-mechanical systems or replacing them with stop signs may well produce safer intersections.”
Moreover, he said, the large size of the boxes, which would be located on sidewalks, could create a hazard for the elderly or handicapped people.
Peter Thomson, who lives on Bellingham Place, said this proposal was no different from one that included large control boxes that was rejected by the architecture commission and the civic association in the late 1980s. Gillooly said there was a difference, in that this proposal has technology that wasn’t available 20 years ago.
Neighborhood leaders wondered why the boxes were so large. “In all other phases of modern society everything is growing smaller, but it traffic it seems that everything is getting bigger,” said Young.
“There is an awful lot of cable in there,” Gillooly explained. “Reducing the box in size isn’t as easy as you might think.”
The matter has yet to be concluded. The commissioners asked BTD officials to create a cardboard mockup of the boxes that could be taken around to each proposed location at each intersection so they could see how much of an intrusion the boxes would actually make.
Even if the city can show that the current lights cause problems of safety or maintenance, neighborhood leaders urged the city to go back to the drawing board. “In a historic district, there are different criteria,” said Thomson. “This plan shouldn’t get off the ground.”
Limits Proposed for Boston Common
Beacon Hill Times
Common problems: too many people, too many events by Stephen Quigley
A move is underway to ban large events on Boston Common. Large scale events that draw tens of thousands of people are ruining the Common’s lawns and walkways, according to city officials and Henry Lee, president of Friends of the Boston Public Garden, an advocate for the Common.
Last year, more than 1000 events were held on the Common, whose fragile infrastructure is being torn asunder.
“Our goal is to make this the greatest park in America and to identify the challenges and opportunities of doing that,” Councilor Michael Ross said in opening the first public hearing on Boston Common that was held Wednesday night at Suffolk University Law School.
This hearing was more exploratory in nature as Ross, joined by Boston City Councilors Sal LaMattina and William Linehan heard from a variety of city officials as well as civic leaders about their ideas and concerns about the future for Boston Common.
The Common and Public Garden, which comprise more than 40 acres in total are Boston’s great prizes in the heart of the city.
The area receives a tremendous amount of foot traffic on a daily basis as three major MBTA stops, Park Street and Boylston Street Station and the new Silver Line bus stop have direct access in the area as well as commuters who use the Boston Common Garage. In addition to these users, there are also many college students from Suffolk University and Emerson College who regard the Common as their front yard. And there are also dog owners from Beacon Hill and Back Bay who consider the Common a wonderful place to walk their pets.
Officials from the Boston Parks Department outlined how the Common gets extensive use on a daily basis. This use has had an adverse effect in many areas like the Parade Grounds near Charles and Beacon Streets that have been closed off for repairs to the grass.
In some cases, pedestrians in cutting across corners from the paved paths have destroyed the grass and created dirt paths. The department plans to add more fences and then turf or brick areas in order to repair and to maintain the integrity of the park.
Boston Parks Commissioner Antonia Pollak told the Councilors about the planned changes involving a head house at Park Street for elevator access. She noted that the MBTA is under court order to bring the station into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Pollak also said that there is an opportunity to have the MBTA step up with an added commitment to help maintain the Common.
“Boston Common should no longer play host to large scale events,” she said.
Area 1 Police Captain Bernie O’Rourke told the councilors that crime in the Boston Common is down through the efforts of added policing from the safe street teams, but that crime in the general area including Downtown Crossing is up.
He acknowledged that as the police intensify their efforts in the Common, the crime moves to a different area. He also noted that in the last two weeks there were 21 arrests for people selling drugs. He said that most area assaults are drinking related. He also said reinstituting the 11:30 pm. to 6 a.m. curfew on the Common has also helped in reduction of direct crime in the Common.
Ironically, O’Rourke also noted that the Common is safer when there are events taking place.
Homelessness continues to be a problem in the Common, but due to the curfew this problem has moved more into the North End and Downtown Crossing area. Park rangers also are patrolling the area but their main objective is to be more visible than an active crime deterrent.
The number of mounted rangers has decreased from 25 in 2000 to about 12 this year. The area that they patrol goes as far as Copley Square.
James Green from the Mayor’s Office on Homelessness said that efforts are being made to find permanent housing for some of the homeless especially in this area. He noted that in the annual census that was conducted in December, the number of homeless in Boston went down from 306 in 2006 to 184 in 2007. He also noted that his agency is working closely with other agencies like the Pine Street Inn and Shattuck Hospital.
Henry Lee from the Friends of the Public Garden said, “the Common is all things to all people.” There were, he added, more than 1,000 events in the Common last year and that in the last 25 years the use has overwhelmed the maintenance.
Lee noted that the ground is harder than a concrete floor because it has been compacted by so much by foot traffic and that it is impossible for rainwater to seep through to the roots of the trees. He also said that everyone from developers to abutters should be doing more to help.
Tom Kershaw who owns the Hampshire House and helps run the Frog Pond told of how that part of Common is used both in winter as the skating rink and in summer as the wading pool might be a perfect place for a restaurant. He noted that without a liquor license a venture like Tavern on the Green that is located in Central Park in New York City would have a difficult time in being financially viable.
“This is our front door,” Peggy Ings from Emerson told the councilors about Emerson’s involvement in bringing resources to help the Common. She mentioned that the College runs and maintains a café on Tremont Street. However, the café runs at a $35,000 deficit, but she said that this is cost Emerson is willing to bear when you consider what was happening at this corner of Boylston and Tremont Streets before. Emerson is also planning to install a wrought iron period fence down Tremont Street that will cost more than $250,000.
“This is a wonderful start, and Suffolk understands that it has a responsibility to the Common,” John Nucci, said Suffolk University Vice president.
One resident mentioned that he hoped that the Common or surrounding streets would be more bicycle friendly. Another longtime resident echoed public officials when he noted that large events are damaging the Common.
Rev. Kathy McAdams from Ecclesia Ministries told the Councilors, “we need to look at all the needs of all Bostonians and that poverty and homelessness are not a crime but needs to be addressed by government.”
Colin Zick from the Beacon Hill Civic Association told of how he became involved in the Common with two boys playing baseball.
“When I saw the homeless problem and drug activity, I got involved.”
He mentioned that the Boston Common Management Plan that was written more than 10 years ago foresaw and addressed many of today’s issues.
“Enforcing the rules and regulations in place will go a long way in improving the Common,” he said.
The Councilors asked for input and found out that the Common is much more than a playground or park. For more than 400 years, the Common has been used for not only recreational uses but as a public space for all Bostonians.
The date for the next meeting has not been scheduled.
Common problems: too many people, too many events by Stephen Quigley
A move is underway to ban large events on Boston Common. Large scale events that draw tens of thousands of people are ruining the Common’s lawns and walkways, according to city officials and Henry Lee, president of Friends of the Boston Public Garden, an advocate for the Common.
Last year, more than 1000 events were held on the Common, whose fragile infrastructure is being torn asunder.
“Our goal is to make this the greatest park in America and to identify the challenges and opportunities of doing that,” Councilor Michael Ross said in opening the first public hearing on Boston Common that was held Wednesday night at Suffolk University Law School.
This hearing was more exploratory in nature as Ross, joined by Boston City Councilors Sal LaMattina and William Linehan heard from a variety of city officials as well as civic leaders about their ideas and concerns about the future for Boston Common.
The Common and Public Garden, which comprise more than 40 acres in total are Boston’s great prizes in the heart of the city.
The area receives a tremendous amount of foot traffic on a daily basis as three major MBTA stops, Park Street and Boylston Street Station and the new Silver Line bus stop have direct access in the area as well as commuters who use the Boston Common Garage. In addition to these users, there are also many college students from Suffolk University and Emerson College who regard the Common as their front yard. And there are also dog owners from Beacon Hill and Back Bay who consider the Common a wonderful place to walk their pets.
Officials from the Boston Parks Department outlined how the Common gets extensive use on a daily basis. This use has had an adverse effect in many areas like the Parade Grounds near Charles and Beacon Streets that have been closed off for repairs to the grass.
In some cases, pedestrians in cutting across corners from the paved paths have destroyed the grass and created dirt paths. The department plans to add more fences and then turf or brick areas in order to repair and to maintain the integrity of the park.
Boston Parks Commissioner Antonia Pollak told the Councilors about the planned changes involving a head house at Park Street for elevator access. She noted that the MBTA is under court order to bring the station into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Pollak also said that there is an opportunity to have the MBTA step up with an added commitment to help maintain the Common.
“Boston Common should no longer play host to large scale events,” she said.
Area 1 Police Captain Bernie O’Rourke told the councilors that crime in the Boston Common is down through the efforts of added policing from the safe street teams, but that crime in the general area including Downtown Crossing is up.
He acknowledged that as the police intensify their efforts in the Common, the crime moves to a different area. He also noted that in the last two weeks there were 21 arrests for people selling drugs. He said that most area assaults are drinking related. He also said reinstituting the 11:30 pm. to 6 a.m. curfew on the Common has also helped in reduction of direct crime in the Common.
Ironically, O’Rourke also noted that the Common is safer when there are events taking place.
Homelessness continues to be a problem in the Common, but due to the curfew this problem has moved more into the North End and Downtown Crossing area. Park rangers also are patrolling the area but their main objective is to be more visible than an active crime deterrent.
The number of mounted rangers has decreased from 25 in 2000 to about 12 this year. The area that they patrol goes as far as Copley Square.
James Green from the Mayor’s Office on Homelessness said that efforts are being made to find permanent housing for some of the homeless especially in this area. He noted that in the annual census that was conducted in December, the number of homeless in Boston went down from 306 in 2006 to 184 in 2007. He also noted that his agency is working closely with other agencies like the Pine Street Inn and Shattuck Hospital.
Henry Lee from the Friends of the Public Garden said, “the Common is all things to all people.” There were, he added, more than 1,000 events in the Common last year and that in the last 25 years the use has overwhelmed the maintenance.
Lee noted that the ground is harder than a concrete floor because it has been compacted by so much by foot traffic and that it is impossible for rainwater to seep through to the roots of the trees. He also said that everyone from developers to abutters should be doing more to help.
Tom Kershaw who owns the Hampshire House and helps run the Frog Pond told of how that part of Common is used both in winter as the skating rink and in summer as the wading pool might be a perfect place for a restaurant. He noted that without a liquor license a venture like Tavern on the Green that is located in Central Park in New York City would have a difficult time in being financially viable.
“This is our front door,” Peggy Ings from Emerson told the councilors about Emerson’s involvement in bringing resources to help the Common. She mentioned that the College runs and maintains a café on Tremont Street. However, the café runs at a $35,000 deficit, but she said that this is cost Emerson is willing to bear when you consider what was happening at this corner of Boylston and Tremont Streets before. Emerson is also planning to install a wrought iron period fence down Tremont Street that will cost more than $250,000.
“This is a wonderful start, and Suffolk understands that it has a responsibility to the Common,” John Nucci, said Suffolk University Vice president.
One resident mentioned that he hoped that the Common or surrounding streets would be more bicycle friendly. Another longtime resident echoed public officials when he noted that large events are damaging the Common.
Rev. Kathy McAdams from Ecclesia Ministries told the Councilors, “we need to look at all the needs of all Bostonians and that poverty and homelessness are not a crime but needs to be addressed by government.”
Colin Zick from the Beacon Hill Civic Association told of how he became involved in the Common with two boys playing baseball.
“When I saw the homeless problem and drug activity, I got involved.”
He mentioned that the Boston Common Management Plan that was written more than 10 years ago foresaw and addressed many of today’s issues.
“Enforcing the rules and regulations in place will go a long way in improving the Common,” he said.
The Councilors asked for input and found out that the Common is much more than a playground or park. For more than 400 years, the Common has been used for not only recreational uses but as a public space for all Bostonians.
The date for the next meeting has not been scheduled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)