During last night’s open hearing on the Hendries property Steven Connelly of Connelly Construction read a sharply worded letter in which he called on Planning Board member Peter Jackson to recuse himself from the special permit process for 131 Eliot Street, stating that Mr. Jackson was “jeopardizing the integrity” of the board and that his conduct was “unbecoming” that of an elected official. Mr. Jackson said the request was “outrageous.”
Mr. Connelly cited three “premises” in his call for Jackson to recuse himself. He said Jackson refused to implement the zoning by-law regarding the FAR bonus according to the language and intent of the by-law as approved by town meeting in 2007, that he has a conflict of interest given he was a member of the Planing Board and the member of a permitting team for a competing development at 2 Adams Street which has not yet broken ground, and, lastly, he “acted with ‘unclean hands'” in implementing the oak tree RFP.
Regarding the RFP, Connelly cited Jackson’s opposition to Maltby’s opinion and response in which he said the tree should be removed. The Board has said that Maltby was disqualified, because he did not conform to the specifics of the RFP. Connelly argues that the language did not indicate disqualification. He also said he did not receive the Largess assessment in time to craft a response on the evening Largess presented, having only received the report that night. He also attributed negative media attention to statements Jackson made in the press and to a network of relationships through the environmental group The Friends of the Blue Hills. Largess is a member as is Milton resident Tom Palmer who supplied photos of the tree to this web site. Mr. Whiteside said he too was a member of the Friends of the Blue Hills and NEPRWA (The Neponset River Watershed Association.
Regarding the conflict of interest, Mr. Whiteside, Chairman of the Planning Board, said, “I am quite sure you are wrong there.” It was noted that Jackson did consult on the landscaping of the 2 Adams Street property, but that he was not a member of the Planning Board at the time. Connelly feels that Jackson is attempting to kill the FAR bonus and that will benefit the property at 2 Adams over the Hendries site.
The FAR bonus stems from an article passed at the 2007 Town Meeting. FAR stands for Floor Area Ratio. The Planning Board drafted an article that would allow a bonus of up to 15%. The article, which was amended and passed, reads:
If the Planning Board determines that the area of the lot in the business district is the same as the qualifying lot area and that a development will preserve, if feasible, or replace in-kind, one or more significant natural feattures on the site and provide significant amenities to the public, the Planning Board may permit a bonus not to exceed 15% for a higher FAR.
There appears to be significant disagreement between Mr. Connelly and the Board over the intent of this article. Connelly believes the language of the article “puts the weight and priority with the design of the building.” The Planning Board seems to think that the health of the tree is a priority. Even if Mr. Connelly elected to forgo the bonus, Mr. Whiteside said that the presence of the tree “was in the public interest” and that they would need to look very carefully at that [special permit].”
Several residents spoke at the hearing in support of preserving the tree including representatives from Sustainable Milton and the Amateur Gardeners Club as well as Stephen O’Donnell of the Historical Commission. Jackson said the Planning Board had received 29 emails in support of the tree, and Elise Brink, a Canton Avenue resident, said she had collected 144 signatures on a petition she had circulated. Mr. Connelly did not stay for the entire hearing and Mr. Whiteside noted that. “Observe that Mr. Connelly has seen fit to leave the room. His absence does not enhance the process.”
The hearing will be continued on March 24th at which time the Planning Board is hopeful of hearing from Connelly’s architect and/or arborist.