August 1, 2007
This is to register an official complaint with the Town of Framingham regarding the South Middlesex Opportunity Council (SMOC) and their subsidiary the South Middlesex Non-Profit Housing Corporation (SMNPHC) regarding work at 517 Winter Street and violations of the terms of the Site Plan Approval decision of the Framingham Planning Board dated April 12, 2007. These violations include:
 |
| Photo of work being done at 517 Winter on Sunday, July 29, in violation of town orders. |
1. Outside construction work has taken place three Sundays in a row in blatant violation of the terms of the Planning Board decision, specifically Condition #24 under "E. Site Construction." This was especially egregious on Sunday, July 29, when work included thunderously loud removal of paving at the exit of their driveway onto Ardmore Road. (See photograph.) The "supervisor" of the work, the shirtless man in the photograph, approached me when I took the picture, but before he could do anything, I said, "You are aware that you're not allowed to work here on Sunday, right?" He replied, "They told me I could work on Sunday," to which I replied, "They were wrong." Unfortunately, I did not have a copy of the Planning Board decision with me, but SMOC is required to have a copy on the premises. I can only assume they did not. They did not stop working.
2. Further to this, on several occasions, interior work continued well into the evening (once well past 11:00 p.m.), at which time bright lights from both inside and outside the building were visible from as far away as Edgewater Drive. The Town did not place conditions on the work hours inside the building, but these conditions would appear to belie SMOC's assertion to the Planning Board that operations at the proposed "Sage House" would have a lesser impact on the neighborhood than the previous occupant, the Framingham Nursing Home. This is especially true since at least one light appears to be a spotlight or floodlight shining into adjoining properties. SMOC may have installed this light as a security measure following the drug smuggling operation allegedly run out of the Sage House on Clinton Street and the home invasion perpetrated by one of the residents of a SMOC lodging House earlier this summer.
3. SMOC failed to regularly clean Town streets within 200 yards of the driveways as required in Condition #23 under "E. Site Construction." This should have occurred daily as needed, but in fact a street sweeper was only brought to the site recently, was therefore unavailable for use during much of the construction, and has only been used once or twice. In addition, Ardmore Road has frequently been partially blocked by trucks and wooden sawhorses as work was done on the rear driveway. This was especially problematic since SMOC never obtained street closing permits from the Town. Even when the street was blocked, there were no "Road Closed" signs or detour notifications.
4. SMOC has so far failed to install the landscaped screening around the generator on the west side of the building as specified in the approved plans. They should not be granted an occupancy permit until this is installed.
5. SMOC has so far failed to install the children's playground shown on their site plan or build the 60" fence around it as described in Condition #15 under "B. Infrastructure/Site Design/Landscaping." They should not be granted an occupancy permit until this is complete.
6. SMOC has so far failed to install the dumpster shown on their site plan or build the "decorative fencing" as described in Condition #16 under "B. Infrastructure/Site Design/Landscaping." They should not be granted an occupancy permit until this is complete. (As a reminder, SMOC ran an illegal trash transfer station at 517 Winter Street in 2006, which was not alleviated until neighbors lodged two complaints, one after SMOC promised to solve the problem but did not, so the town needs to keep pay special attention to this matter.)
7. SMOC has failed as of this writing to begin to build the stone dust pedestrian walkway leading from their driveway to Winter Street as described in Special Condition #4 under "II. Special Provisions." There is no strict requirement for this in said Planning Board decision, but there was never any "good faith effort" made as called for in the decision, and would seem to call into question statements made by SMOC at the Planning Board's public hearings.
8. SMOC's paid consultant, Robert Michaud of MDM Transportation Consultants, made a highly questionable presentation recommending against a Winter Street entrance to 517 Winter Street at the Planning Board's public hearings, a recommendation that was directly contradicted by the Town's Traffic and Roadway Safety Committee, which recommended a Winter Street entrance. In his presentation, Michaud stated that one reason against a Winter Street entrance was the necessity of tree removal to build the driveway, knowing that the Planning Board is generally against cutting trees. In fact, SMOC had a large tree removed from the Winter Street frontage almost immediately after beginning work on the property. Again, this is not a legal violation, but goes to show the lengths SMOC will go to to deceive the Town.
I hope that the Town will take these issues into consideration when inspecting the property and deciding whether SMOC has met the terms of their agreements as part of their application for an occupancy permit. I hope it will also give the Town pause and raise awareness in municipal governments throughout the region that SMOC's word cannot be trusted and that any agreements with them must be in writing, carefully examined for loopholes like "good faith effort" which are too vague to be enforced, and then vigorously enforced to the limit of the law.
SMOC and the other social service industry contractors have taken their lead from Commonwealth's Executive Office of Health and Human Services that contracts and promises are unimportant and that accountability is at the bottom of the priority list. The Commonwealth has abrogated its responsibility regarding accountability of its contractors and ensuring their ethical conduct. Until such time as the Town can convince them to do their jobs, it is up to the Town to do it for them.
I therefore urge the Town to abide by the strictest possible interpretation of all laws, contracts, and agreements, and to grant no permits to SMOC or other social service agencies until all terms of all contracts and agreements have been completely fulfilled. It is sad that a social service company and a Commonwealth agency dedicated to social service should inspire so little trust, but it is essential for the Town to protect itself until such time as some reasonable level of trust can be established by the social service industry.
Have a comment, correction, or suggestion? Write to the webmaster!