On November 22 , SMOC withdrew its appeal from the Zoning Board of Appeals. As you recall from the last ZBA meeting, The ZBA was divided on the application but two members were ready to deny the application. They never got the chance.
ZBA chair Phil Ottaviani read a letter from Bowditch & Dewey, SMOC's law firm, which read (not an exact transcript):
In light of the Attorney General's decision, we would like to withdraw our appeal of the Building Commissioner's denial of our change of use for 517 Winter Street. We believe this decision means that the Planning Board's review will be limited to those items allowed under MGL Chapter 40A, section 3 (the Dover Amendment).
Of course, this is just a cover story -- SMOC's appeal had nothing to do with whether or not the law was valid. They wanted to he exempted from the law, meaning that the appeal assumed the law WAS valid. Those of use who attended the meeting felt that SMOC's withdrawal was a public relations stratagem, possibly a result of their hiring a new PR director. They probably felt they couldn't afford any more bad publicity.
Richard Paul stated that he had no problem with the withdrawal, but wondered if it would be with or without prejudice. Phil Ottaviani said that you can't simply withdraw an appeal and that no matter what the ZBA does, SMOC's next step is to go back to the Building Commissioner and then to the Planning Board. He asked SMOC's attorney what their preference was. One of SMOC's lawyers said that they would prefer a withdrawal without prejudice. Susan Craighead so moved, Richard Paul seconded, and chair Phil Ottaviani voted yes and announced the motion passed 3-0.
The withdrawal of SMOC's appeal means that they will almost certainly not file a lawsuit and will instead comply with the new town bylaw requiring them to appear before the Planning Board for site plan review. This is not a panacea, of course. The Planning Board's purview is limited, and while they may require things of SMOC that are outside their purview, SMOC's compliance is not guaranteed, and a lawsuit might still be filed.
This, combined with SMOC filing a parking plan for 517 Winter, seems to indicate that SMOC will begin "chipping away" at the four point denial of their change of use. They have had over three months to submit a floor plan, and they will surely do so eventually. That means all they have to do is provide more documentation on their educational programs and undergo site plan review to have their Sage House program approved for 517 Winter Street. We still have some cards to play, so this is not certain, but the odds are against blocking SMOC from 517 Winter.
In short, this was not a short term victory, but it is a long term victory. Because they will now have to appear before the Planning Board each time they want to open a new program in Framingham, SMOC will no longer be able to sneak them in to town as they have in the past. Site plan review by the Planning Board is a public process, as opposed to the somewhat secretive process that had existed before the August bylaw change.
This should be a great incentive to site some of their programs elsewhere in the future. In the past, Framingham was the path of least resistance -- it was easier to site in Framingham than in other towns, and that led to Framingham having a greater number of social service facilities per capita that most other towns in the region (7.2 per 10,000 residents compared to 3.9 in Marlborough, for instance). Framingham's changed zoning bylaw and added public scrutiny of social service providers in Framingham have leveled the playing field and long term, those numbers will equalize somewhat in the years to come.
Our rallying cry from the beginning was that Framingham bears too much of the social service burden and has a disproportionate share of these facilities. We have been proven right in this, and thanks in part to the pressure we applied, the town is now taking steps to correct the problem, with more changes to come. For instance:
Every STEPPS supporter should feel proud of this accomplishment, even if we eventually fail to stop SMOC from opening a shelter at 517 Winter.
Have a comment, correction, or suggestion? Write to the webmaster!