Re: I support a demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert Avenue in Roxbury
Michelle Murray
Proper
study of this treasured landmark should not be compromised by
abbreviating the time required for thoughtful and careful historical
appraisal of the property.
My neighbors and I wish to ensure you have the time needed to assess things and as such want you to impose a demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert.
Thank you and best wishes,
Michelle Murray
30 Juniper Street
Hi Rosanne,
I am an 88 Lambert Ave. advocate, and live at 49 Cedar Street, which abuts the Nathan Hale School and want you to know I support a demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert Ave. in Roxbury.
Proper study of this treasured landmark should not be compromised by abbreviating the time required for thoughtful and careful historical appraisal of the property.
My neighbors and I wish to ensure you have the time needed to assess things and as such want you to impose a demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert.
Thank you,
Daniel Cruz, Jr.
49 Cedar Street
Roxbury, MA 02119
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park PRC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-prc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/highland-park-prc.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park PRC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-prc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/highland-park-prc.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Rodney Singleton
The first matter on the agenda was to determine if the neighborhood meeting with the owner and HPNC had been conducted according to regulations, and it was determined that it had been.
The second matter was to determine if a 90-day demolition delay was warranted. Due to the unanswered questions about the importance of the garages and outbuildings on the site, the committed voted to approve a demolition delay to allow time for further study of the potential historic significance of the garages and grounds.
Dear Rosanne,
I add my voice to supporting the demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert Avenue. Until there is an overall assessment and plan for preserving the historic house, I agree that no change should be made to the property.
Thank you,
Ena Fox
6 Romar Terrace
Roxbury, MA 02119
From: highland-park-neighborhood-watc...@googlegroups.com <highland-park-neighborhood-wat...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of DEBORAH HART <dha...@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 12:02:32 PM
To: michell...@gmail.com; Dan Cruz
Cc: rosann...@boston.gov; Christopher Grant; Kathleen vonJena; Highland Park Neighborhood Watch; highland-park-prc@googlegroups.com; Greg Galer; Alison Frazee; Yawu Miller; Highlandparkboston; Kai Grant; Leah Harrington
Subject: Re: I support a demolition delay on the garages at 88 Lambert Avenue in RoxburyWe,
Also support the demolition delay at 88 Lambert Ave in Roxbury. Proper assessment is needed, before moving forward. We concur with many neighbors that have articulated why we should wait.
Cheers,
Deborah, Kevin
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park Neighborhood Watch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-neighborhood-watch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to highland-park-neighborhood-watc...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/highland-park-neighborhood-watch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park Neighborhood Watch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-neighborhood-watch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to highland-park-neighborhood-watc...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/highland-park-neighborhood-watch.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Highland Park Neighborhood Watch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-neighborhood-watch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to highland-park-neighborhood-watc...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/highland-park-neighborhood-watch.
Rodney Singleton
Neighbors clash over housing sale
Landmark designation bid may block deal
Jule Pattison-Gordon | 8/30/2017, 11:40 a.m.
Banner photo
Owner Robert Patton-Spruill proposes including a deed restriction protecting the property’s mansion, while allowing the brick garages to be demolished to clear space for new housing units.
The site went on the market in the fall of 2016 with a $2.9 million asking price. This year, the owners accepted a developer’s offer with the sale still unclosed by Banner press time on Tuesday. But news of the plan alarmed several local residents who say they believe the would-be purchaser has a bad track record. These residents said they fear the developer could downgrade quality of life by crowding in too many new units on the 0.6-acre lot or that he might demolish an 18th-century mansion.
“I appreciate it’s his [the owner’s] piece of property, but we have to live with it when he’s gone,” neighbor Rodney Singleton told the Banner. “He’s ultimately trying to get the best sales price [by building it up].”
Meanwhile, Robert Patton-Spruill, who owns the property with his wife, says personal financial circumstances make selling soon imperative. He said he has been trying to work with neighbors to enact some protective regulations in advance of selling that would restrict the site’s use.
The extensive property features an 18th-century seven-bedroom mansion, garages, a carriage house and two small ponds. It was once the home of Henry Hampton, the founder of the film production company Blackside, known for works such as “Eyes on the Prize,” an award-winning civil rights movement documentary series.
After an Aug. 22 meeting, the Boston Landmarks Commission approved a demolition delay. Patton-Spruill says this means he is blocked from making changes to any part of the property, not just the mansion, while the research is conducted to determine if any of the site is historically significant.
By rendering the property temporarily undevelopable, the Landmarks Commission delay could scare off his selected buyer and thus essentially lock away all the money he invested in his property, he says.
“That means at least three more months I have to carry a building I can’t afford to live in,” Patton-Spruill told the Banner “I have lost my freedoms of ownership completely. I can’t replace a window without their approval first.”
Mistrusted developer
Patton-Spruill told the Banner that he had received offers from dozens of prospective buyers, and had accepted an offer from developer Joe LaRosa. Speaking to the Banner on Tuesday, he said the deal had been made prior to the Landmark Commission’s delay and he suspected it would now fall through.
Some community residents opposed the sale because they mistrusted the property’s future under LaRosa. Area resident Jon Ellertson says LaRosa has a reputation for making low-quality, densely-packed housing and disregarding community concerns.
“He’s shown no interest in preservation, only interest in building as many densely-designed low-quality houses as he can,” Ellertson said. “It’d make a big difference if the buyer was one whose track record was of working with a particular community to see what the community’s vision is for the property. “
Ellertson says that LaRosa bulldozed a nearby Greek revival house after promising to preserve it. Another nearby LaRosa property has become home to loud, late-night student parties that it sometimes require police interventions to shut down, Ellertson added.
Singleton expressed similar wariness on allowing LaRosa to own 88 Lambert Avenue.
“It is a valuable piece of history that should not be torn down,” Singleton said. “In the hands of Joe LaRosa, we have no confidence in anything.”
Patton-Spruill told the Banner on Tuesday that he selected LaRosa because he was the only prospective purchaser willing to build “as of right” — that is, not seek zoning variance. As such, LaRosa would be limited to constructing a lower number of units on the property.
“LaRosa was the only one willing to buy as of right and not over-build,” Patton-Spruill said. “That’s why he was the final choice.”
Singleton provided the Banner with a series of emails from this April on which he was cc’d. According to the email exchange, Ellertson told Patton-Spruill he was concerned about LaRosa, stating “We have for the record seen Joe LaRosa say one thing for the public record and do the opposite.”
In the emails, Patton-Spruill responded that he understood the wariness toward LaRosa but that the developer’s offer allowed him to shed the costs of a large house and acquire sufficient funding to move his grandmother into assisted living on a desirable timeline.
“We understand why there is a lack of trust with him [LaRosa],” Patton-Spruill stated in an April 24 email. “We have honestly done our best in getting the property shown to everyone that was interested and able to make a purchase of this size.”
In an earlier email also on April 24, Patton-Spruill stated, “I am aware of the communities [sic] problem with him and I wish he wasn’t the one to step up to the plate, but he does have the best offer and is willing to allow me … to get my grandmother situated in a new spot.”
Patton-Spruill told the Banner he intended a deed restriction to protect the mansion house from demolition. In one April 24 email, he stated he told LaRosa he would “need to make a plan to keep the Big House and rebuild the barn,” and that “he [LaRosa] seems open to it.”
Unwanted density
Patton-Spruill said he wanted to protect against overcrowding of units onto the site by seeking an as-of-right developer. He anticipated six units would be permitted under current zoning, should the site’s garages be demolished.
Patton-Spruill told the Banner he had presented various plans over the years, that included higher unit counts. Some residents said they believe as many as 14 units are intended for the site.
“I wish Robert Patton-Spruill all best — I’d love for him to make all the money he can on his property — however, to suggest taking a site with a single and opening it up to where someone could put 14 townhouses there is not something the neighborhood could warm up to,” abutter Daniel Cruz told the Banner.
Ellertson said that he has not seen site plans but doubts six units could fit with sufficient off-street parking and setback allocations. Singleton also said he regards six units as overbuilding and that he does not believe the mansion will be safe from demolition.
Patton-Spruill told the Banner he presented his vision in a community meeting on Aug. 18. He said 15 people attended, of whom ten remained to vote on the proposal. At the end of the meeting, 9 people voted in favor of a plan to demolish the brick garages while maintaining the wood frame carriage house, and one person abstained.
Four days later, during a meeting with the Landmarks Commission, residents called for historic investigation, thus halting and potentially derailing his proposal. A petition initiating such a meeting required signatures of ten registered Boston voters.
An investment seized away?
Patton-Spruill told the Banner that for decades he invested the profits from his filmmaking into purchasing and rehabilitating boarded up degraded houses in the area, in order to help improve safety and life in the neighborhood. He and his wife, Patti Moreno, were awarded Discover Roxbury’s Puddingstone Awards in 2015 for helping preserve the neighborhood. Patton-Spruill says when he bought 88 Lambert Avenue in 2002 it was run down and a site of some illegal activity.
“88 Lambert Ave was a wonderful property, but absolutely no money had been spent on maintenance and care of it,” he said. “I spent a million dollars preserving it and now, because it looks so nice because I spent so much on it, they say it’s a landmark.”
Now that his kids are in college, his parents have passed away, and his grandmother needs to move into assisted living, Patton-Spruill said the house is too big and too expensive to maintain and that he needs to tap into this asset to afford assisted living for his grandmother.
He says he feels blindsided at being subjected to a historical preservation bid as a homeowner outside of a historic district, and regards the bid as misguided.
“They’ve effectively put me in a position where without working my behind off and struggling, I could easily go bankrupt because my largest asset doesn’t have a title anymore,” Patton-Spruill said.
Jon EllertsonThanks,Hi Kai, I want to clarify the record here: our neighbor Robbie Patton-Spruill worked with Joshua McFadden to schedule, publicize and hold the Friday August 22nd meeting at HYCC. The "Community Meeting" was to fulfill Boston Landmarks Commission's requirement in the Article 85 Demolition Delay process. HPNC was not a cosponsor in any sense of that term. but some who attend HPNC meetings were present as were interested persons who reside outside Highland Park. I was present and asked Joshua if it was customary at the end of such a meeting to call for some sort of vote to determine how attendees felt about the issue and to inform BLC how we regarded the application to raze the garages at 88 Lambert Ave. Joshua replied that he did not know about protocol for a vote since this was the first time he had conducted an Article 85 Neighborhood Meeting.You should direct your critique and questions to MONS and to the BLC as to how these Article 85 Demolition Delay Community Meetings are conducted. We all will benefit from understanding the process better since the wave of development sweeping over Highland Park as well as Roxbury as a whole requires that we understand what tools are at our disposal.
A portion of the discussion had dealt with the distinction between the 19th century carriage house and the early 20th century masonry garages with an effort by some of us to say, maybe the latter could be demolished as long as the wood framed carriage house was protected. But Robbie's petition before the BLC was a blanket term of "garages" by which Robbie included the carriage house. There was a tentative show of hands to favor saving the carriage house but allowing the masonry garages to be razed...but Joshua did not indicate that in his role as MONS staff that he was recording or even restating why some were "voting" and some abstaining. Thus, it cannot be characterized as a vote one way or the other. I also want to point out that the discussion of possible alternatives to preserving the garages was presented by Robbie by way of 8 plan sheets showing a 6 unit development. Missing from the packet was (1) a plan for off-street parking, required by the City for any new development as well as (2) a site plan showing these proposed units relative to the entire 88 Lambert Ave parcel. Such a site plan and parking plan, drawn to scale with indication of set-backs, would have made this "potential" replacement of the garages a more credible offering. Instead, we were left wondering if the proposed 6 units was a reasonable "replacement" for the garages.On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Kai Grant <kai....@gmail.com> wrote:An Important Note of Retraction from Kai Grant at 13 Dudley Street; Roxbury, MA 02119
On Tuesday, August 22nd an email came across my inbox in regards to keeping garages on a historic property and important landmark: 88 Lambert Avenue / the Henry Hampton House.
Without doing my due diligence and not knowing the entire story and who owned the property presently, I signed on to a letter of support of not demolishing the garages at 88 Lambert Ave. It may be too late, but I am fully retracting my support to not demolish the garages.
And here is the reason why:
Upon writing the letter of support not to demolish, I believed that 88 Lambert Avenue had been sold to a contractor that would not have the best interest of the community at heart and did not know that it was still owned by two neighbors and Black Roxbury Entrepreneurs- Robert Patton Spruill and Patty Moreno who have done nothing less than use 88 Lambert Avenue to raise tens of thousands of dollars over the last 17 years for Discover Roxbury Garden Tour, Roxbury Film Festival, the Hawthorne Community Center and many other charities here in Highland Park. They were pioneers for the GREEN SUSTAINABLE movement well before Simon and Evan and those who have taken the baton. Rob & Patty are the founders of Roxbury-based businesses "Garden Girl", "Film Shack", and "617Digital". Because of them, tax dollars were accumulated and circulated RIGHT HERE in Highland Park. Because of them, HGTV covered the first house on Dudley Street where Mandy and Casey live and the beautiful Marble fronts where Rodney and Joanne reside in a historic preservation show. They have the Highland Park communities' best interest at heart and would never do anything to endanger its' historic assets
I further learned that these two long term community residents (who ironically purchased 88 Lambert in disarray and through their own capital investment preserved and saved the property) met with HPNC on August 18th. The purpose of the meeting was to get a letter of support to demolish the garages and have that portion of the property restricted to 6 units total as of right and demolish the barn for green space and preserve the house and surrounding land. This would also restrict the next owner from coming in and building some wicked monstrosity next to a neighborhood school (the Nathan Hale)
At this meeting, the HPNC came to a decision by way of a vote of the body: the brick garage structures could be demolished and the barn should remain as is. The body’s vote was unanimous with one abstention to lend a letter of support. This letter of support was to be presented before the Preservation board at a meeting held on August 22nd.
On the morning of the Preservation board hearing, an email was circulated to not support the project. I mistakenly signed on lending my support. I thought it was the typical " Highland Park contractor story" that we see so often- one of lack of care and responsibility to the community who resides in it, therefore I signed on.
There are several questions that need asking concerning HPNC operating principles:
Why aren't the HPNC leadership standing by the votes of the body and instead rallying for change in the final hour via email without consideration of agreements made between the parties at community meetings? And why are leaders providing personally driven thought or opinion after the meeting instead of at the meeting? Why are we then rallying folks via email after the fact to oppose the body’s vote? Wouldn’t the best practice possibly be to:
- Send out minutes on a meeting with detailed vote of the body and discussion points asking folks to read it
- Identify oneself as a leader in HPNC who voted in support of the project
- Express your decision to change your vote
- Give reasonable explanation express you have had a change of thought & why this may be of importance to the entire neighborhood
- But RESPECT the vote rendered by the body and express that the letter of support stands regardless of your opinion or get those who originally voted to change their votes
I have personally witnessed a similar situation in a hearing last year in regards to long-time resident project to build on Marcella. HPNC voted and lent a letter of support and then a member of the leadership led a personal charge in verbal opposition at the hearing itself without letting the body know.
While I commend the HPNC leadership’s passion and drive to preserve our community, this ‘final hour decision flipping’ must be quelled for the sake of the community's voice. The community's vote should trump personal opinion. Why should I spend time and energy going to meetings if our vote is not respected?
I look back on the 88 Lambert Avenue email now and realize I should have reached out to receive more information from both sides: the HPNC and from Rob and Patty who I believed sold the property to a developer.
Full disclosure: Rob + Patty are my family. Regardless of family ties, 88 Lambert Avenue and its' owners have been a blessing to this entire community in many different ways. They are community members who should be treated with dignity and respect.
Therefore, I am asking that HPNC stand by the original vote of the body and rescind it's demolition delay of the garages.
Sincerely,
Kai Grant
Co-Founder, John Eliot Square Neighborhood Association
13 Dudley Street
Roxbury, MA 02119
Best Regards,Roxbury, MA 0211915 Dudley StreetJESNAKai GrantCo-Founder
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to highland-park-neighborhood-watch+unsu...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to highland-park-neighborhood-watc...@googlegroups.com.