Planning Board opinions on Temple Shalom shifting

At the close of last night’s planning board session the members’ opinions on the Temple Shalom development appeared to shift slightly with Jackson and Innes indicating support of the overlay, Duffy likely opposed, and Whiteside and Lynch undecided, but seeming to lean in favor.

Mr. Whiteside stated that he felt, “It was a good meeting.” After reiterating that there was no guarantee that the proposal would happen without a rewrite of zoning, he voiced his ongoing concern with the temple being “tucked back”  in the property and did not find it very attractive. He also wants the traffic engineer to return to speak to how the revised proposal that has both a pharmacy and possible cafe and / or food mart would impact traffic patterns.  Lastly, he has reservations abut the overall density of the project. “I have an open mind; but I am not there yet.” It was Mr. Whiteside who weeks previously had read a 5 page opinion in favor of a development that consisted of a pharmacy and temple only. At that time Jackson and Innes voiced support for Whiteside’s opinion.

Earlier in the day, Ed Duffy had spent about half an hour walking the area and commented on the absence of traffic on Crown and Decker streets and said all he could hear was the rubbish truck. He stated that regardless of the form development took, that half hour of quiet would be gone.  While Mr. Duffy has not made a clear statement in opposition, his comments indicate he does not endorse the overlay.

Innes took the time to address a comment made during Citizen Speak. A resident had voiced a lack of confidence in the Planning Board. She was disappointed to hear that. She reminded the audience that they were still early in the process and that there would be plenty of opportunities in the future for the community to voice their opinions. She also stated that despite certain perceptions, the development was viewed by the board with an eye toward the value to the neighborhood and town; not the temple’s financial condition. Innes who had previously voiced support for an overlay and wanted to explore the addition of a third entity, has now seen that entity added. Though she did not make an explicit statement in support. Every indication is that she will support it.

Bernie Lynch who in an earlier session said he had not heard anything that would change his mind clearly heard something at this session that would. In twenty years on the planning board he could not recall receiving so many emails and phone calls regarding proposed development.  He said, “I am on the fence.” But he also said, ” I can’t ignore these people . . . Just from hearing people talk . . . this area has been neglected.” During the Citizens Speak a couple of residents had submitted signatures collected in support of the development. Mr. Lynch appeared somewhat surprised and impressed by the number collected.

It was Peter Jackson, current chairman of the board, who made the strongest statement in support of the overlay. He said, “in my point of view the presentation demonstrates that [the development] can fit attractively without an undue burdeon” on the neighborhood. He shared Whiteside’s concern bout the location of the temple and also about cut through traffic.However, he feels those can be addressed in the site planning process. He felt there was “nothing for the neighborhood or the town to be afraid of in this plan.”

These comments were made largely in response to a presentation from Coffman Realty and a lengthy “Citizens Speak.”

The Coffman presentation provided new details and specificity on the proposed development. Dubbed the “Tucker Village Marketplace” it would:

  • locate a rebuilt  the temple in the back northeast corner of the lot
  • the pharmacy would be on Blue Hill Parkway on the northwest corner of the lot
  • a third structure for additional multi-tenant retail space of approximately 10,000 square feet  would be on southwest side.
  • the development would allocate 36% of the lot to green space

The proposal illustrated how the buildings would be located to deal with the geographic grade change that exists. The north side of the property is approximately 20′ lower than the south side. In addition to the design, Coffman spoke to potential tenants. After discussions with some neighbors, Coffman put out feelers to local entrepreneurs who might have interest in the space and received a positive response from the management of Java Joe’s, Flat Black, and the Harvest Coop. However, it is premature to consider any of these as committed merchants.

About 34 people took advantage of the Citizens Speak. Of those 8 spoke in opposition to the development and 22 in favor. One speaker noted that the turnout in favor of the proposal was likely the result of a late email campaign and that in fact there were many more opposed to the development than had shown up. Of those who oppose the development, there are 3 key concerns: increased traffic and safety, a decrease in property values, and a general decline in overall quality of life (e.g. increased noise, light pollution etc). Of those in favor, the key benefits would include access to amenities that require them to currently drive out of the area, reinvigorating a small community that has seen commercial businesses disappear over the years, some financial relief to the town from commercial taxes.

The planning board will next meet on 11/12 and again on11/19 @ 6:30 at the Council on Aging. At some point they will have to take a vote. If they vote to recommend the overlay there will be additional public hearings, they will submit their recommendation to the Selectmen for inclusion in a warrant that will be taken up at a special Town Meeting (tentatively) to be held in February.

  20 comments for “Planning Board opinions on Temple Shalom shifting

  1. Joseph Patrick O'Malley
    November 6, 2009 at 4:31 pm

    As a 30 year resident of Decker Street, I am excited about the proposal for the Tucker Village Marketplace. It will add needed amenities and value to the Tucker Village Neighborhood. It will also allow the Temple Shalom Community to continue to be an important part of our Town.

    Shalom,

    Joseph Patrick O’Malley

  2. Lisa Murphy
    November 7, 2009 at 7:54 am

    The temple got a few people in the neighborhood to support this by working on their fears of 40
    B housing. Most of the neighborhood does not support this. I don’t think anyone in Milton would like to have this development plopped down right next to their houses. Last summer the town looked at what the greatest and most likely tax benefit for this project would be. The greatest benefit to the town only works out to less than $13 per person. Should we really sell out the neighborhood for so little. This project will increase traffic on the sides streets and put the children of the neighborhood at risk. Is $13 per person really worth risking the lives and safety of the children in this neighborhood. To do this is truely immoral. This project hurts people, children especially.

  3. Nick Macke
    November 7, 2009 at 12:54 pm

    Please don’t try to fool anyone, there are plenty of real neighbors in our neighborhood that support this project as was evident at the Planning Board meeting. The ‘Tucker Neighborhood Association’ (an issue-group formed on the basis of defeating any commercial development at the temple site) is sadly sounding more negative than ever.
    We are extremely fortunate to have this opportunity in our neighborhood as it’s a real chance to make a substantial improvement; an improvement in our quality of life and community as a whole. Let’s embrace this as positive change! Step back and see the bigger picture here.
    No people, children, or neighbors will be injured in any way.

  4. john fichtman
    November 7, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    Neighbor,
    Traffic speeds and volumes do impact the quality of living on our small streets with little setbacks. I have been pleading for a year now for the proposed traffic impacts to be addressed and they have not been.
    John Fichtman
    91 cheever st

  5. Joseph Patrick O'Malley
    November 7, 2009 at 1:54 pm

    Mr. Fichtman, it DOES strike me as very desirable to have Temple Shalom and Campbell Pre-school, as part of the Tucker Village Marketplace. This plan, will truly be the heart and soul of the Tucker Village Neighborhood.

    Shalom,

    Joseph Parick O’Malley

  6. john fichtman
    November 7, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    neighbor joseph,
    This is getting more into the site planning shuffle in which locations and flows will be looked at in multiple scenarios but as be representative of the overall challenge of squeezing these different elements together, the latest drawings show all of the cars entering to park at the cvs being channeled directly to the temple/school building and the drivethru pharmacy traffic going alongside the school’s play area. People walking their kids to the school from different directions will need to navigate thru or around the different parking lots.
    john fichtman
    91 cheever st

  7. Catherine King
    November 10, 2009 at 11:43 am

    Thank You Marion for the clarification. Nick. I live on Concord Ave. I dont know you. I did go by your house with my son on Halloween and felt sad that we seemed to have such nice neighbors but may never know you. And, I have seen you at a couple of our neighborhood association meetings.

    Nick, about 3 years ago a group of my neighbors met with the intention of forming a neighborhood watch group and ultimately a neighborhood association. Marion may not even know this. I was away at the time and was not at the couple of meetings they held but I think no one was really familiar with the process or had the time to devote to it. The idea was always there and when the development proposal at Temple Shalom came up for discussion, we ended up meeting at each other’s houses, mine included, to discuss this but as you can see the groups got larger and the opinions got more diverse. It becomes difficult when you have people yelling different opinions in your living room.

    Nick, it has been difficult and painful for me to see what started out as a group eager to listen to each other and, for the most part respect each other’s opinion become so divisive. There are times when I, too, wanted to run for the hills. There have been times when I, too, wanted to disassociate myself from some of the converstaions. But I talked myself through it by looking in the mirror and asking myself what it would mean if I ran.

    I wanted to belive that our neighborhood was bigger than this issue.

    I came to believe that I wanted the neighborhood association to survive above all else.

    I came to the conclusion that I would be talking the talk but not walking the walk if I opted out because I didnt agree with everyone’s positon and the manner in which they displayed that position.

    We need to respect diversity of opinion and, as with all other diversity not run and hide from it.

    We need to keep in perspective that other people have travelled many different roads and taken many different path’s to “West Milton” than we have.

    People in my neighborhood have led lives I envy and some have led lives that I may not have survived. I respect that. I expect other people to respect the position that I take as I struggle to respect the positon other people take when they choose to reject housing for people.

    What I will not do is advocate for a corporation over humanity. There is no institution or person that will make me do that.

    I wish that you had hung in there with your neighborhood association. I have only seen you there a couple of times, but it seems that sometimes you stand from a distance, almost with a long stick poking at us without really listening to us or getting to know us.

    There are gems in our neighborhood and I would never have found them if I had thrown out the rocks.

    I had a conversation with a neighbor when this development came up for discussion. I realized that while there were a lot of people who agreed that this was not a good idea, I also realized there would be many who would come into it with other ideas. My comment at the time was “ultimately we are strangers, we may always be strangers, we may find that there will be nothing else in our lives we have in common except for this one issue and how we handle that will be a true test to our committment to our neighborhood”

    One other thing. I did not start out being opposed to commercial development here. You may not know this. I started out along the “nice grocery store and a coffee shop that will make me feel good about walking around with their logo on a cup” line. I now realize how naive I was. I sat at the Town Farm meeting last night and heard some surprising comments around Affordable Housing. You should get out more and listen to what your neighbors are truly saying and what it means to us as a neighborhood to have to interpret them.

  8. Nick Macke
    November 10, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    Cat, thank you for the thoughtful reply to my posts. I appreciate your insight, perspective, and respect your point of view (also enjoyed seeing your mummy costume on Halloween). Who knew that this blog would be such a forum for neighborhood discussions?!

    I care immensely about our neighborhood and my neighbors which is why I ran for Town Meeting upon moving to Milton and volunteered to join the Planning Board sub-committee over the summer months. This town means a lot to me. This is where we have chosen to start our family and for that reason, I’ve been involved in this community from day one and continue to strive to be a part of the solution. Milton has a lot of work to do to reach a better sustainability.

    I’m an advocate for equality. I support and volunteer for the Human Rights Campaign. The ‘Tucker Neighborhood Association’ interest-group has made a point to take a unified stance on any particular issue by mere majority, not representing those neighbors in our neighborhood who might not agree with the mob-rule of the ‘association’. I believe that all opinions should be heard and respected equally as do many of my neighbors who have chosen to disassociate themselves from your group. After all, we all live here and we all deserve the respect of being heard. In fact, most of us in favor of the Tucker Village improvement live within 300 feet of the temple site and find immense value in this proposed project. My ideas and opinions, while very valid, have not been welcome in your group. Nonetheless, I have pursed forward with a different group to be a part of this development process in the interest of our neighborhood.

    Anyone who knows me and my family will tell you that we have done a lot of work to update our 1922 home. It’s been a true labor of love for us as we have seen our first home project published recently in a magazine. We live in a very special place and I consider our neighbors to be outstandingly genuine people who are my friends. I grew up in a small town in southwestern Nebraska, a village with only 1,107 inhabitants. It’s amazing how much better I know my neighbors here in Milton than those in that small Midwestern town. My husband Ted and I have a true sense of community with the neighbors living directly around us. My perspective on this development is that we can have an even broader sense of community in our neighborhood, a place that will be an asset to all those living here on the commercially-neglected west side of Milton. It will be a place to get to know someone like yourself who doesn’t live directly across the street from me. This would be a wonderful thing and an improvement upon the utter lack of any such place now.

    The current ‘Tucker Village’ proposal offers so many benefits to our neighborhood. A neighborhood market would provide the opportunity for you and me to meet, encounter other neighbors, and do our necessary grocery shopping right here in our neighborhood instead of driving to Quincy, Braintree, Dedham or Boston. This place would be ours and I value that. ‘Tucker Village’ assures the preservation of Temple Shalom and the Campbell School as a valuable part of our neighborhood. I also find a tremendous amount of value in these things.

    There is no fear of high-density housing. There is instead a desire for something that will progress our neighborhood and be an asset to our neighbors. The benefits of high-density housing are for those how live within the development, they will have a good home. While this is great, as neighbors, what do we gain from this scenario really…perhaps the noble feeling of helping humanity? Don’t be mistaken, I am not an advocate for any corporation. Instead, I am advocating for locally owned business in my community and advocating for adding value to our neighborhood. It’s simple really; our neighborhood will be more desirable and sought after when we have these amenities.

    I have made a point to stay positive about this redevelopment in our neighborhood and I’ve decided to become a part of the solution in speaking with developers and my neighbors about what we would like our neighborhood to become. I realize that you and I may never see eye to eye on this issue. That’s okay. We are all different people with our own opinions of what’s best. Ultimately, I view this is a rare opportunity for progress our community while preserving what’s there now.

    I’ll look forward to seeing you at tonight’s neighborhood discussion to better understand this proposal. It’s so unfortunate that the TNA is distributing fliers to instill fear in people. There are a lot of untruths floating around out there and this will be a good time to listen to the truths and realities of the ‘Tucker Village’ proposal.

    Nick Macke
    37 Crown Street

  9. Keith Wick
    November 11, 2009 at 12:19 am

    I hope that the TNA association can continue to grow and become a viable organization that works for the good of the neighborhood. I personally found it very difficult to get involved with the association given the tone and stance taken by some members. When my wife and I responded via email in a stance open to the possibility of commercial development, we were sent emails saying, “if we had really thought about the issue then we’d not be in favor of commercial development”. This was insulting to me in that it implied my assessment and thoughts about the issue were insufficient based on my stance. I also attended a meeting where I felt that members open to development were interrupted, insulted, and told to keep quiet to the planning board about what was discussed at the meeting. While I understand that the building of a neighborhood association takes time, the overall vibe was something I had neither the energy nor time to invest in given my current life circumstances. I understand this is my individual choice and thus I have chosen to take part in the attempted making of Tucker Village as I feel it can be an asset to the neighborhood. I’ve found positive minded people who can have differing opinions and discuss their views without fear of being berated and bullied.
    I think Tucker Village brings many desirable amenities to the neighborhood. There continues to be issues that need to be addressed, but I feel these can be done via the leadership of the planning board with a strong neighborhood voice. We can find solutions to traffic and the safety of our children. We can address the preservation of green space, the issues of noise and trash. Let’s continue to find solutions and brainstorm ways to increase the value of our neighborhood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *