Update: 02.19.10 – Two pieces of commentary have been added. One, Temple Shalom and Tucker Village Proposal – Home Stretch, by Phil Matthews of Milton View and another, Milton: Bad precedent or spot zoning, an opinion piece in the Patriot Ledger by Tim Murphy.

Read more

After a brief but vigorous discussion the Warrant Committee voted last night to recommend the zoning overlay article that will be on the Special Town Meeting warrant in February by a vote of 7-3.

Tom Hurley, chairman of the Warrant Committee, began the discussion by having Emily Innes of the Planning Board join them to answer some outstanding questions from the previous session. These pertained to how the current proposal compared to the Fruit Center Marketplace regarding the size of the commercial footprint and parking spaces. The Fruit Center is approximately 32,826 sq ft including both floors and has about 222 parking spaces.

• the overlay would also apply to two other properties in Milton;  St Mary’s (the school not the church) and St Elizabeth’s (on both sides of Reedesdale). These properties both satisfy the criteria specified
• this is the first change from commercial to residential to come before the Planning Board. The Fruit Center did not come before the Planning Board. It was handled by Board of Appeals.

Commentary by Frank Schroth

Nothing is easy.

Especially the primary matter before the Planning Board: the redevelopment of the Temple Shalom property. It is a matter of tremendous significance to the town in general and to the immediate stakeholders in particular: the Temple congregation and the neighborhood residents.

The advent of the new year is an appropriate time to look back and review. The question is not whether the board has handled this well or poorly, but how it can do better going forward. Feelings of uncertainty, doubt and anxiety can be alleviated in part by improved clarity, consistency, respect, and courage from the board. With the belief that tomorrow is an opportunity to improve upon yesterday, we suggest the following New Year’s resolutions to the Planning Board. These qualities are certainly not absent but they can be improved:

Read more

The Planning Board has posted the Traffic Impact Assessment conducted by Vanasse and Associates. This was done for the proposed zoning overlay article to enable commercial development at the Temple Shalom site. The proposed development would consist of a pharmacy, 2nd retail business (possibly a grocery), and a new, smaller temple.

The assessment is to undergo a peer review. The Planning Board is going to select from one of the following firms to perform the peer review:

• Howard Stein Hudson Associates
• The Beta Group
• BSC Group

You can find the full text here.

At their Thursday, December 17th meeting of the Warrant Committee heard arguments for and against the proposed zoning overlay article that is to appear in the Warrant for February’s Special Town Meeting.

Tom Hurley, Chairman of the Warrant Committee, explained that the Warrant Committee, an all volunteer board appointed by the Town Moderator whose primary responsibility is a balanced town budget, is tasked with making recommendations on all articles in the town warrant. Though the Warrant Committee meetings are public there is no input from anyone outside the committee unless invited by the chairman. Mr. Hurley asked the the attorneys for the parties involved in the Temple Shalom zoning overlay (Andrew Upton for the neighborhood group and Ned Corcoran for the developer) as well as a town resident from each side to speak (Stefano Kiel for neighbors and Lynda Packer for Temple Shalom). Each speaker was allocated 10 minutes followed by a questions and answers from the committee.

Read more

The Planning Board met last night to grind through the final copy edits and revisions to a zoning article that would be the first step in the potential redevelopment of the Temple Shalom property to contain a CVS, second retail structure, and new, smaller temple.

Together with Coffman Realty and their attorney Milton resident, Ned Corcoran, the board reviewed everyone’s comments in turn and made edits accordingly after some discussion on the point in question.

Alex Whiteside had the lion’s share of revisions to the draft which he authored with input from Corcoran and one of his revisions sparked the most debate. Whiteside proposed inclusion of a property value analysis. Peter jackson, Chairman did not see the need for it arguing that the board had heard sufficient testimony. Whiteside pressed the issue expressing concern for residents whose values might go down as a result of the development, “What do you say to these people? Tough luck?” After discussion with regard to the area encompassed (e.g. should it only be the abutters?), time frame (do values go down in 3 years, 5 years) and consequences of other development on property values (i.e. if a 40B development went in would impact on property values be any more or less?) the board agreed to include language on a property analysis. Most likely it will be restricted to abutters at the time development is complete and conform to appraisal industry standards. The final language will be in article to be reviewed this evening.

Read more

At an abruptly called special meeting by the Board of Selectmen, residents voiced their thoughts, opinions, and concerns regarding the development of the Temple Shalom property. The Board also heard from Peter Jackson, chairman of the Planning Board, and gave him their input.

The temple was the principal agenda item for a meeting that was scheduled sometime over the weekend. It came just three days before the Planning Board intends to vote on whether to recommend a zoning overlay to Town Meeting. The Planning Board will be meeting twice this week. First on 12/2 to continue deliberations and then again on 12/3 to take a vote. December 3rd is the deadline the Board of Selectmen has set for receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Board. Jackson said the Planning Board will meet that date.

Read more

Among the people who rose to address the board during the citizen speak portion of  the 11/12 Planning Board meeting was Andrew Upton of DiNicola, Sobel, and Upton. Mr. Upton was retained by Neighbors Against Commercial Development, a group of local residents who oppose the redevelopment proposal of the Temple Shalom site. The proposal, which is being put forth by Coffman Realty, consists of a pharmacy, a new, smaller temple, and a third stand-alone retail structure.

Mr. Upton voiced concerns with regard to the transparency of the process, traffic congestion issues, the economic process, and “inclusionary claims”.  He had been retained 48 hours previous but did note that the developer was “supported by an army of consultants” and that there was a disparity in the bargaining power of the respective groups. Prior to being told to “wrap it up” by Peter Jackson, the Chairman, Mr. Upton asked that the board not take a vote on the overlay at this time.

Mr. Upton was not the only citizen speaker asked to “wrap it up.” At the commencement of Citizen Speak, Mr. Jackson instructed speakers to limit their comments to 1 minute and restricted the speakers to those who had not spoken at the previous meeting.

Read more