Attorney Dunn speaking before Town Meeting
by Frank Schroth (updated 11:05)
Last night’s Town Meeting session concentrated on one article, Article 2 of the Special Town Meeting Warrant which sought approval for the Planning Board to grant a special permit to ongoing landscaping businesses in Milton. This article was a citizens petition, signed by ~260 residents, brought forward by owners Thayer Nursery. After a lengthy discussion the article, which required a 2/3 majority, passed by a voice vote.
Alex Whiteside, Chair of the Planning Board and Town Meeting Member (TMM) from Precinct 9, reviewed the content of the article which provides a framework for what a special permit application should contain. It is extensive. A special permit will need to include, but not be limited to, plans covering existing conditions, deeds, drainage, wetlands, landscaping, operations, lighting, buildings, and number and types of vehicles. Site plan approval will require specifics on storage of fertilizer, hours of operation, vehicle use, delivery schedules etc. The article, written largely by Whiteside, was a substantial revision of an article in the annual town warrant written by Attorney Ned Corcoran who represented Thayer. The Planning Board did not feel that article had sufficient protections for the neighbors and the revisions were extensive enough to require a new article. Town Meeting voted the original article be referred back to the Planning Board. The debate and discussion focussed on the revised article.
Ned Corcoran spoke after Mr. Whiteside and explained that Milton had no bylaws that allow a landscaping business. He said of the 6 landscaping businesses in Milton, 5 “were in peril.” (Thayer, Thomas, Town Tree, Eagle Farms, and Driscoll). The Massachusetts land court had ruled that landscaping is not permitted by zoning. Corcoran argued that if someone complained about any of these operations the Zoning Board of Appeals would need to order a cease and desist. Neighbors did complain about Thayer and there is a cease and desist order on Thayer at the moment.
Matt Dunn, an attorney for neighbors Phil Joehenning and John Rowe, also presented. He noted a history of Thayer failing to comply with rulings. He argued that the article did not have proper oversight and that there was a conflict of interest as Whiteside was the member of a board tasked with making a recommendation on an article he authored. He also noted there was no enforcement aspect provided for.
The issue of enforcement was raised by several speakers who advocated that the article be referred back to the Planning Board for further study. These speakers included residents and direct abutters Mr. Joehenning and Mr. Rowe, and Pamela Lepore. Mr Joehenning said that in an effort to compromise the neighbors had come up with a list of 14 points that wanted addressed. These included using electric vehicles, erecting a 20′ concrete wall to block noise and inspection of diesel fuel tanks. Ms. Lepore showed a video of truck traffic and noise experienced from her yard. Town Meeting members Sheryl Fleitman, Emmet Schmarsow, Cindy Christiansen and Ed Duffy spoke in support of the these neighbors. Duffy, also a member of the Planning Board, said at a recent meeting that Josh Oldfield said he wanted to live the American Dream. Duffy responded saying the neighbors “want to live the Milton dream.” Christiansen sited the legal fees ($78K) incurred by the town in passing a special permit to allow Coulter Landscaping to operate in town and voiced concern that additional legal fees result from approval. She made a motion to refer the article back to the Planning Board, This was defeated
A number of residents and Town Meeting Members spoke in support of approving the special permit.The residents largely spoke of their fondness for the Oldfields, their business, and noted that they felt Thayer contributed to the neighborhood, was fundamental in helping establish the Scotts Wood Historic district, and did not feel that the operations had a negative impact on the area. Town Meeting members who spoke in support of the article included Peter Mullin, Terry McNeil, and Bryan Furze, recently elected to the Planning Board. All essentially argued that the article was complete as written and provided the tool needed to a) retain businesses that have been an asset to the town and b) protect neighbors from any possible adverse effects of running those businesses. The Planning Board, the Warrant Committee, and the Board of Selectmen all endorsed passage of the article. The majority of Town Meeting agreed. The article passed.
Town Meeting also passed unanimously articles 1-5 of the Annual Town Warrant. These are standard housekeeping articles that authorize the Treasurer to borrow in anticipation of taxes, collect taxes, etc (You can find the complete 2014 Annual Town Meeting Warrant here.) In addition, Town Meeting approved article 1 of the special town meeting warrant (see previous link) which authorizes that bond proceeds of $302,850 be appropriated to the Capital Stabilization Fund.
Town Moderator Brian Walsh reviewed a new rule regarding procedure that was voted on. Speakers on an article are now limited to 10 minutes and cannot speak a second time until everyone who wishes to be heard on an article speaks. Also, no one can speak more than twice on an article without the permission of the moderator. The change was recommended by the Town Government Study Committee and Town Meeting voted to accept it.
My comments at last night’s town meeting were in support of Milton tax payers.
I do support the neighbors and I also support Thayer Nursery. I want all to thrive in peace, quiet, and a safe and profitable environment.
When adding and subtracting numbers about the cost and benefits of town businesses, one cost that had not been mentioned is the cost of litigation that the town has incurred after a similar zoning article was added to our bylaws a year and a half ago. Town Administration wrote that “The Town has paid $78,551 (through February 2014) in legal fees relative to the Coulter issue” in answer to my question as to much the town has spent in legal fees since that article was approved at the fall 2012 special town meeting.
When seventy eight thousand dollars in litigation fees is included in the equation, in my opinion the cost-benefit arguments change and the tax payer pays. I think it is important to keep this somewhat hidden cost in mind when making decisions about how we handle business growth and how we spend tax payer dollars.
Cindy L. Christiansen, Town Meeting Member Precinct 7
Now, that the town has insured the longevity of Thayer Nursery in Milton I think we can expect Thayer Nursery to ” Adopt” one or many of the pocket park reservations in the town. Perhaps, they can start with the newly reconfigured Manning Park in East Milton as a physical demonstration of the Oldfield’s appreciation and thank you for the town’s support.
Let the plantings begin !
Paul – Our policy is not to participate in comment threads and a subsequent comment will not be posted. However, I do not want the general reader to be misinformed. The town did not ensure anything for Thayer other than the opportunity to obtain a special permit. There is a cease and desist order in effect and it will stay in effect until such time as a) it is lifted by the court that issued it or b) Thayer has a special permit approved by the Planning Board. Further, if a permit is granted it will only remain in effect for a fixed term and will need to be renewed at the end of the term. The longevity of Thayer is now in Thayer’s hands. They may ensure it, but the town has not.
Thayer Nursery has ignored zoning laws and has done pretty much anything it wants for years. It pays no regards whatsoever to the effects on the neighbors. The almighty dollar has always been king. The nursery made the exact same promises 10 year ago when the neighbors complained to the planning board. If they had kept the promises, why are they stll making the sme ones. This new zoning law will now give them carte blanche. God help the neighbors! The nursery provides letters of support from friends in town who have no idea of what it is like to live next to them. The nursery blames the neighbors for causing trouble, claiming that the neighbors are elitist and did not understand what it is like to live next to a nursery. Most of the neighbors were there for years. Neighbors did not complain until the “nursery” changed. Neighbors turned a blind eye to most of the zoning violations and only came forward when things got out of hand. Milton has made a HUGE mistake. Time will show this. So sad.
If a replay is available of Monday’s town meeting, I would suggest watching the 2+ hours of discussion on this topic. I felt both sides were adequately represented, and town meeting came to a sensible conclusion based on the various commentaries and presentations.
The zoning change that was written by the planning board seems to strike a reasonable accord between the neighbors and Thayer Nursery. Even Mr. Joehenning noted he thought the neighbors could get comfortable with the new zoning language, if only it had more ‘specificity’. That was a critical moment in that one of the major opponents agreed to the fairness of the way the zoning was rewritten, and the only real remaining issue was how enforcement of the new zoning law would be achieved.
That left the voting body to determine if the special permit application and reapplication process would be sufficient enough to constitute the enforcement mechanism we were looking for. Numerous commenters who had real estate law backgrounds expressed that this was perhaps the most detailed zoning law they had ever seen.
It should also be noted that Ned Corcoran’s presentation showed the arrangements Thayer Nursery was currently making to mitigate the noise and dust pollution problems they had placed on their neighbors in recent years. Although this certainly doesn’t excuse their actions in the past, it seems to be the first and right step to move forward. In addition to this, landscaping operations still cease to exist at Thayer Nursery until they apply for and are granted the special permit. The tractor trailer deliveries and bobcat loading activities are a part of their operation as a Nursery, which rendered one presenter’s video to be a moot point.
Although I can empathize with the plight of the abutters, I was proud of what town meeting achieved on Monday evening, and I think a just conclusion was reached.
Mark Botelho
Town Meeting member, Precinct 3