Fells project to get environmental review

Development's impact a concern

Under fire from parks advocates, state environmental officials reversed earlier pronouncements and said yesterday that a full environmental review will be required for a major development in the Middlesex Fells Reservation.

The decision comes six months after the Gutierrez Co., the developer, asserted that it had already reduced its plans so dramatically that the Langwood Commons project should no longer be subject to review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act.

The reversal was a victory for parks advocates, who had charged that the developer was unfairly skirting environmental scrutiny with the help of the Patrick administration, which has committed to accelerating permits for businesses.

A leading advocate for the Fells said yesterday that he was pleased that the administration reconsidered the potential impact after hearing from thousands of concerned residents and park users.

"There is a learning curve; we have a new governor, a new secretary, a new commissioner," said Mike Ryan, executive director of the Friends of the Middlesex Fells Reservation.

"I think it maybe took a little bit of time for this new administration to analyze the situation and come to the right conclusion that this is a project that's going to have some real, serious impacts, just like the previous environmental secretaries and DCR commissioners had."

Neither the development company nor its attorney returned calls yesterday.

The Langwood Commons site in Stoneham is unusual in that it is completely surrounded by park land and a state-owned parkway, though it was originally developed by the Seventh Day Adventist Church before the Fells was established as conservation land. The Boston Regional Medical Center, which was abandoned nearly a decade ago, still stands there, as well as still-operating medical office buildings and an assisted-living facility.

The Gutierrez Co. and Simpson Housing plan to build 405 residential units and 225,000 square feet of office space, a project that was already scaled back to satisfy a lawsuit from neighbors.

The plans underwent years of state environmental review, and the developer participated in a roadway redesign at the request of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, which oversees the Fells and nearby parkways. But when another state entity, the Massachusetts Historical Commission, objected to the parkway changes, the Gutierrez Co. withdrew in frustration, telling the state it was abandoning the traffic changes and therefore would no longer need an environmental review.

The Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act requires permitting agencies to study the environmental consequences of developments. The often-lengthy process gives the public input and typically requires builders to modify plans to reduce or compensate for any harm.

But MEPA only applies to projects of a certain size or to those that need state permits. Ian A. Bowles, secretary of energy and environmental affairs who oversees DCR, had said previously that it appeared that Langwood Commons could legally withdraw from the process if there were no roadway changes. But he said that DCR would review whether it had the authority to require additional traffic analysis or parkway changes.

In its review, which took six months, DCR agreed with activists' assertion that the thousands of cars coming to the new Stoneham development would pose a public safety risk on the narrow parkways. Therefore, either the state or the developer would have to improve the roadways, triggering a mandatory environmental review.

"DCR believes that a responsibility exists to make sure the parkways are reasonably safe for its users," Jack Murray, the DCR deputy commissioner, wrote in a letter to the MEPA director.

As proposed, Langwood Commons would have no traffic lights or crosswalks to help the new residents walk to the Fells, Murray noted.

And cars waiting along Woodland Road to turn into the development could cause backups and dangers on the parkway, he wrote.

Either the developer or the state would have to alter parkways to guard against those public safety risks, he determined.

Bowles wrote a letter to the developer yesterday saying that Langwood Commons must make changes to accommodate the additional traffic and complete an environmental review.

"I find that the project comprises not just the office space and housing that you propose to construct, but also the traffic improvements that are reasonably needed to ensure safe and convenient travel for pedestrians and motorists," Bowles wrote.

Ryan said the activists will continue to monitor the project, but are pleased it will be subject to a thorough review because of the sensitive surroundings.

"This is very, very important. It all comes down to whether or not the public can continue to enjoy the reservation with backed-up traffic, noise, and pollution," Ryan said.