“Pursuant to the Act, the Board, after convening a public hearing and making the above findings of fact grants a Comprehensive Permit to the Applicant for the construction of fifty-seven units of rental housing in a single building . . .”
— Milton Board of Appeals written decision on the Chapter 40B Comprehensive Permit application for residences at “The Hendries Building” 131 Eliot Street.
The permit granted 131Eliot St LLC to construct a 57 unit apartment building at the corner of Eliot and Central is a historic moment for Milton, a town lacking in affordable housing. The permit granted under MGL Chapter 40B allows a developer to build residential housing that can be exempt from local zoning bylaws if a percentage of the housing is made available at an affordable rate.
What’s next?
131 Eliot St LLC and the town both need a demolition permits from the Conservation Commission (ConComm) for the existing structure (Hendries building). The town owns a portion of the property, essentially the parking lot and portion of building above it that take up the northeast corner. There is an agreement between to the town and 131Eliot St LLC to remove the building by the end of March. However, that is unlikely. The town recently requested a continuance from ConComm until their April meeting. The town has repeatedly reset the demolition date. The reasons for this may include lack of a demolition permit, lack of a signed contract with the demolition firm, and logistics related to the demolition (e.g. coordination with the MBTA over suspension of service).
131 Eliot St LLC did appear before ConComm to review demolition permit and appear to be making some progress. The chief concern of ConComm at the moment is storm water management. This concern is for both the demolition permit and the site development permit. John Kiernan, Chair of the Commission, wanted to be sure that the catch basin can handle the amounts of water used during demolition and that the water will be properly cleaned before being discharged into municipal waterways. the 131 Eliot St LLC team agreed to get the commission specs on the filtration systems that will be used.
Kiernan began the recent session with rescinding the enforcement order regarding testing of the tanks noting that 131 Eliot St LLC was not in violation of an existing order. Also of note was clarification from 131 Eliot St LLC that they had granted permission to the town to approach their (the town’s) portion of the building from any point on the property. This was significant in that it had been thought that the town would use open corner space. There are questions about whether that spot is secure as there are tanks underneath the ground there.
The commission had in the past voiced some frustration with the town’s repeated requests for continuances. However, they did not bring that up nor ask any questions when Town Planner Bill Clark and Selectman Katie Conlon requested a continuance at this session.
The Conservation Commission hearing is continued until April 14th.
You can find the full text of the Board of Appeals decision here. The complete list of documents regarding this 40B project can be found here.
Correction: An earlier vesion of this document identified the developer at Carrick Realty. The developer is Eliot St LLC. Carrick Realty was the firm proposing a mixed use development on the site. Both firms are controlled by the Connellys, owners of the 131 Eliot Street propety.
While anything is better than what is there, is there any hope remaining for some form of a mixed use development that was previously proposed and was being discussed privately?
That is a great question and a natural one to ask. The Selectmen have continued to discuss the matter (i.e. Hendries) in executive session. There could be a number reasons for that. 131 Eliot LLC is continuing to pursue their 40B development. To date there has been no public statement from the Selectmen that the private talks you refer to have ended; but that does not mean they haven’t. In short, I don’t know.
If there is one location that makes some sort of sense for a 40 B project ,it is this one. What has happened with this ZBA vote is that the developers now hold all the cards, pending Conservation approval.
My sense from the beginning of this saga was that some sort of development would get approval, and in the end the developers will do what developers do , do what makes them the most money.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out . Traffic will be an issue , the effect on the Town services is still , for some reason, unresolved.
As this is a gateway to Milton from Boston , you would hope that the design of the building would look more like Milton than Dorchester, but this is where the developers have their experience so time will tell.
I have mixed feelings about this development. On one hand it provides for subsidized/ affordable housing at a site that makes sense.
On the other hand this shows what is wrong with 40 B,ie. a developer did not get their way with a conventional development and then reinvented themselves as a 40 B developer.
Time will tell how all this plays out, I am optimistic while being a little skeptical.
a poster comments “…this shows what is wrong with 40B.” An incredulous comment. This development only qualifies for 40B status because the town of Milton in all its history has failed to build “affordable housing.” The town does not meet the 10% threshold of affordable housing stock, so 40B was drafted by the legislature exactly for a community like Milton. Milton was so against any 40B proposal and when it appeared as though they were going to lose this fight, they tried to argue 1.5% of their land area was affordable. This argument also lost. Milton and its views of low income housing may have to be litigated into the 21st century, but it will be a better town for it. I don’t think this issue is what is wrong with 40B, it may illustrate what is wrong with Milton. If the town addressed affordable housing in years past, this wouldn’t be an issue.
Why didn’t you quote the entire sentence.
What I said was what was wrong with 40 B , is that it allows a developer to develop a project after they were denied approval on a conventional project. that is the case at Hendries
If that is ” incredulous ” to you , then that ‘s your problem and thank you for the history of 40 B in Milton,
I thought 40 B was about affordable housing and not low income housing. You might want to read the legislation .