Example email to stop the 88-94 Lincoln St Electronic Billboard.

7 views

Skip to first unread message

Mike D

unread,

Dec 11, 2017, 10:40:46 PM12/11/17

to AllstonBrighton2006

Hi Everyone,

We are requesting your support to stop two different billboards on Lincoln Street. Below is an example of the email you can send for the 88-94 Lincoln St Electronic Billboard.

The billboards are on the same block of Lincoln Street between Portsmouth and South Waverly St. They are located on the northside of I-90 across from the New Balance area. Attached is Google Map view of the locations.

Their are 3 different emails because the two billboards have different issues. The third email is requesting Mayor Walsh to stop supporting billboards.

The example email below is opposing the 88-94 Lincoln Street billboard.

Please send all three emails. The hearing is on Tuesday December 19.

Please request your family, friends, neighbors, work associates, roommates, and tenants to send emails to stop this.

Thanks everyone for their help and support.

Mike

=========================================

Below are draft comments I have written to share to oppose the proposed billboard at 88-94 Lincoln Street in Brighton. I have written an introductory sentence and then made a series of points in separate paragraphs. You can pick and choose what you want to say, and delete whatever references you want to delete. You should put their name and address at the bottom. I am happy to answer any questions people may have if they write to me at dal...@comcast.net.

Joanne D’Alcomo

Example email below:

=========================================

The subject line, by the way, should probably say, for clarity:
Opposition to variance request for 88-94 Lincoln Street, for 12/19/17 hearing, BOA# 778978

I am writing to urge the Board of Appeal to reject, at its scheduled hearing on December 19th, the variance request for 88-94 Lincoln Street for construction of a double-sided electronic billboard. There is no justification for an exception to the Boston Zoning Code to be made for erection of this huge glaring electronic billboard in this overwhelmingly residential neighborhood.

Here are some of the reasons why I oppose the variance for the billboard:

- The request was already rejected by the Board at a hearing in late May of this year. The variance request currently before the Board is identical. Nothing has happened between the hearing on May 23, 2017 and now to justify a different result. It is unfair to make the community go through the effort of opposing this variance request again, just a few months later, when this is the same request and the conditions are exactly the same.

- The location for the proposed electronic billboard is at the edge of a heavily populated residential neighborhood with low-rise single, two-and-three family homes, and multi-family buildings. Erection of a huge double-sided electronic billboard in this residential neighborhood would be nothing more than a blight on the neighborhood and would likely harm the property values in the neighborhood.

- The billboard would not only be a visual nuisance in the overwhelmingly residential neighborhood in which it would be located, but it would be an eyesore day and night, 365 days a year, for thousands of people living nearby in the Allston-Brighton community.

- The Boston Zoning Code specifically prohibits electronic signs – and that includes large electronic signs such as a billboard-sized sign -- in Brighton, as well in most of the rest of the city. (Article 11, Section 7 states “Electronic signs shall be conditional uses in the Theater District, Lansdowne Street Entertainment District and the Seaport Convention Center District, as shown on Appendix A. Electronic signs are forbidden elsewhere in the city.”) The proposed sign violates this provision of the Zoning Code.

- Even in the limited locations in which electronic signs are permitted under the Boston Zoning Code—and Brighton is not one of them -- the code (Article 11, Section 7 (f)) specifically states that “the illuminated side shall not face a residential zoning district if located within one hundred and fifty feet of a residential zoning district.” The proposed sign ignores this limitation.

- Denial of this variance is particularly important because ON THIS VERY SAME SHORT BLOCK – at 64 Lincoln Street – a permit for a billboard has been allowed by the city because it was “grandfathered” in. (There is no billboard on 64 Lincoln Street currently but a permit has been issued.) It would be unfair to this residential neighborhood to have not just one ugly double-sided billboard permitted, but two.

- The building at 88-94 Lincoln Street has had the same owner for 20 years – since 1997. The owner is listed on publicly available records as “94 Lincoln LLC.” Nothing has occurred suddenly justifying an exception to the Zoning Code at this location allowing erection of a huge electronic billboard. There is an operating business at the site – a cleaning business.

- Under Article 7, Section 3(a) of the Zoning Code, the Board of Appeal cannot grant a variance unless the party seeking the variance establishes that there are “special circumstances or conditions” at the property, and that the “circumstances or conditions are such that the application of the provisions of the provisions” of the Zoning Code would “deprive” the applicant of the “reasonable use” of the land or structure.” This cannot possibly be established because such special circumstances or conditions do not exist. The owner of the property clearly has had “reasonable use” of the property and land for years.

- Under Article 7, Section 3(b) of the Zoning Code, the Board of Appeal cannot grant a variance unless the party seeking the variance establishes that “for reasons of practical difficulty and demonstrable and substantial hardship,” the “granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land or structure.” The party seeking the variance cannot possibly establish this because there is no “hardship” involved in the use of the property, and certainly no “substantial” hardship. The property has been owned by the same owner for years, and there is currently a business in the property.

- Under Article 7, Section 3(c) of the Zoning Code, the Board of Appeal cannot grant a variance unless it is shown that the granting of the variance “will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.” The injury to the neighborhood is obvious since the proposed sign is huge, unsightly, intrusive and nothing but an eyesore in a residential neighborhood. To Allston-Brighton at large, the huge sign would also be a blow and a blight on the area. Property values are skyrocketing in Brighton and Allston as more and more developers are building residences. There is no justification for the Board of Appeal to approve a variance for a billboard that would degrade and cheapen the area, not enhance it. Such a sign would make the area less attractive for existing and new residents, not more attractive.

- Although the parking seeking the variance has tried to argue that the variance should be granted because the electronic billboard could be used for “public service announcements,” such an argument is weak and does not meet the standard for the granting of a variance. Even if there were public service messages placed on the two sides of the billboard, they would only appear for a fraction of the many hours of every day, 365 days a year, that the billboard would be in commercial operation. And whatever vague benefit could possibly come from a small amount of “public service messages” on an electronic billboard in the midst of the many commercial messages cannot outweigh the very tangible and large negative effect that the presence of such a large lighted, unsightly structure would have in a residential neighborhood. In addition, the Massachusetts Turnpike, a road next to Lincoln Street, regularly posts public service announcements.

- The variance should also be denied because it would conflict with the portion of the Zoning Code applicable to Allston-Brighton specifically. The location of 88-94 Lincoln Street is within what the Zoning Code refers to as the “Allston-Brighton Neighborhood District.” The provision of the Boston Zoning Code applicable to the Allston-Brighton Neighborhood District specifically prohibits new billboards subject to state regulation. (Article 51, Section 55 provides that if a billboard was not in existence as of the time of the creation of the Article, and if it is covered by Article 11, Section 6 of the Zoning Code – which applies to billboards subject to state regulation – it cannot be newly permitted and constructed in the Allston-Brighton Neighborhood Zoning District).

- The provisions of the Zoning Code protecting the neighborhood from erection of a new unsightly billboard should be upheld by the Board of Appeal, not tossed aside. The public interest and the neighborhood would be harmed by granting of the variance. Neither the neighborhood nor Allston-Brighton as a whole would benefit by the addition of such a huge lighted eyesore.

Name:
Address:

=========================================

Please email to:

matthew.f...@boston.gov
jerome...@boston.gov

antonella...@boston.gov

warren....@boston.gov
mark....@boston.gov

Ayanna....@boston.gov

Miche...@boston.gov

A.E.G...@boston.gov

Michael.F...@boston.gov

Full names and position:

Matt Fitzgerald