Langwood filing process underway
Published on December 21st, 2005
STONEHAM, MA - The proposed Langwood Commons development leapt toward its final state-imposed hurdles late last month by filing a notice of project change (NPC) with the Mass Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA).
Vowing to continue the battle against the development, Friends of the Middlesex Fells Executive Director Mike Ryan, whose organization has filed suit against Stoneham's Zoning Board for approving the 450-unit development, alleged that the NPC document is riddled with half-truths about the project's environmental impacts.
"We will provide you with key points soon showing clearly that this project would bring great harm to the Fells and its historic parkways and must be once again rejected by the state," Ryan wrote in an e-mail to The Stoneham Independent.
However, according to Simpson Housing, LP, spokesman William Caulder, the NPC application clearly documents how the mixed-use development will eliminate many of the negative environmental impacts cited by opponents during the Gutierrez Company's previous attempt to construct an office park at the former Boston Regional Medical Hospital (BRMC) site.
Among other improvements over the previous Stoneham Executive Center (SEC) office-park plan, Caulder listed a reported 25 percent reduction in peak hour traffic, the scratching of 1,088 parking spaces, and the elimination of eight acres of impervious surface coupled with an 46 percent jump in open-space.
The focal point of the NPC application, the petitioners for the mixed-use, affordable housing development are asking that EOEA Secretary Steven R. Pritchard designate the Langwood Commons proposal as a reduced build alternative over the last ill-fated office-park plan.
Secondly, the NPC also seeks that the redevelopment be classified as carrying "insignificant" environmental impacts compared to the previously pitched SEC plan - which was dropped two-years-ago by the applicants after it was deemed too detrimental to the surrounding Fells Reservation parkways.
"As discussed in the NPC, the project change represents a reduced build program that generally reduces environmental impacts (particularly traffic) compared to the previously proposed project," reads a memo sent to Pritchard by William E. Noll, a traffic consultant for the developers.
"Compared to the formerly proposed site development plan, Langwood Commons exhibits improved compatibility with the adjacent open space and historic resources of the Middlesex Fells Reservation," Noll, of Watertown-based Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, further argues.
Defeated on Dec. 15, 2003, the SEC plan for the former BRMC property called for the creation of a 1 million square foot office park at the site, which is located across from Spot Pond.
Drawing a record number of anti-development comment letters, that previous project was deemed to carry too many negative impacts by Pritchard's predecessor, Ellen Roy Hertzfelder.
Should Pritchard agree to the reduced build determination, the Gutierrez Company and Simpson Housing, LP, would be found to have met a specific demand made by the EOEA Secretary's predecessor after the proponent's failed build to construct the SEC.
With the public comment period for the NPC expiring on Dec. 27, as the application was published in the EOEA's Environmental Monitor on Dec. 7, a decision on the future fate of the mixed-use, affordable housing development should be issued by Pritchard this January.
However, according to Ryan, those against the project should send letters to Pritchard outlining their opposition to the development by Dec. 27, as it might be the last opportunity to do so.
Specifically, the environmental activist claimed that the Gutierrez Company and Simpson Housing, LP, have engaged in an underhanded attempt to bypass all future state reviews of the plan by requesting an "insignificant" determination by Pritchard.
"Simpson has filed a Notice of Project Change with MEPA asking that the 'Langwood Commons' project be accepted as a reduced build plan and as an insignificant change to the previous plan, thus qualifying it as acceptable to MEPA and requiring no Environmental Impact report [i.e. granting a MEPA certificate for the project to go forward]," Ryan alleged.
According to Joe Ferson, a spokesman for MEPA, Ryan's claims are only partially true, as the request for a environmentally "insignificant" finding could lead to a number of determinations, including that the Langwood Commons project will have to start over with the state process from scratch.
However, Ferson did agree that anybody concerned with the NPC should write a letter to the EOEA Secretary by the Dec. 27 deadline.
"Anybody who has comments should comment," Ferson recommended. "And I don't want to get into hypotheticals, but that is one possibility [that no further environmental impact reports are necessary]."
"But requiring a full environmental impact report is also one of the possible options. And I would think the [Secretary's] certificate will reflect where we are with the project at this point. So it would spell out where we go in the process from here," the state agency spokesman added.
According to Caulder, Ryan's claims that the petitioners are trying to circumvent the public process is completely off-base. Specifically, the Simpson Housing spokesman insisted that the applicants are only seeking permission to consider the Langwood Commons project as a reconfiguration of the office-park proposal.
By obtaining that finding, the developers will not have to start the process over from scratch. In addition, the petitioners are requesting that the Secretary update the previous list of environmental concerns to address to reflect the changes in the new mixed-use proposal.
"That's not the case," Caulder responded to Ryan's charges. "We're not trying to forgo this process at all. And I'm very sure we'll be submitting a final environmental impact report."
"Once they review this project change, they'll come up with the scope of items that need to be addressed," he added. "They'll say, this is our finding, and you still need to work on a traffic mitigation program, or you need to come up with another means of transportation."
Caulder's rebuttal of Ryan's accusations seem to be validated through supporting documentation submitted to the state agency with the NPC application. In those documents, the need to both hammer out agreements with other state agencies such as the Department of Conservation of Recreation and file future MEPA reports with the EOEA is continually mentioned.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!