Hey, there! Log in / Register

Roslindale Square landlord says meat market, restaurant won't be forced out if their building is expanded

Tony and Vinny

Tony DeBenedictis (l) and Vincent Marino.

Through his lawyer, landlord Vincent Marino said tonight he has no plans to force out Tony's Market and Redd's in Rozzie if he gets zoning approval to add two stories to the building he owns at 4254-4257 Washington St. in Roslindale Square.

But that reassurance alone was not enough for residents at a hastily called meeting on the proposal tonight at the Roslindale Community Center - or for the mayor's office and City Councilor Tim McCarthy, both of whom said they would ask the Zoning Board of Appeals to defer action on the request at a hearing on Nov. 25.

The city officials acknowledged the meeting was too hastily called for many residents - word only got out over the weekend - and agreed didn't get sufficient answers tonight to questions about the proposal's floor-area ratio, parking and the exact nature of the "piers" on which the new floors would rest.

The meeting got off to a testy start, with Tony and Deb DeBenedictis arguing with Marino and Marino's lawyer, Anthony Ross, over just when they were told about the project.

Ross said he met with DeBenedictis on April 9; DeBenedictis said the first he heard about the project was when a customer asked him about it on Saturday. "It's like somebody stabbed me in the back," he said. When Marino started answering him - he noted he has not raised Tony's rent in 10 years - and Deb DeBenedictis started to question him, Marino shot at her, "Deb, be quiet while I'm talking!"

Once they had settled down, Ross said that because the building was originally constructed with three floors, two floors could be added back without needing to shut the store and restaurant so that Marino could add eight apartments of between 600 and 700 square feet each.

Construction equipment would be staged in the Redd's patio area with external work ideally finished before the patio is to re-open for the summer, he said. Tony's configuration would not be affected at all by the new floors; Charlie Redd, he said, had agreed to give up the space that was formerly used as an entrance and stairway to the upper floors.

Ross holds up rough schematics:

Ross with Marino plan

Residents who live on streets off Washington expressed concern about the lack of parking spaces, saying that while they appreciate the idea of young professionals living carfree in an urban village served by numerous bus lines, commuter rail, ZipCar and Uber, they doubted that none of them would have cars.

Residents said they already have trouble getting out of their driveways due to an influx of construction workers on the substation project. "We have a wicked problem with parking now," Judy Coughlin said.

Joe Porteleki, owner of Roslindale Hardware and a founder of Roslindale Village Main Street, supported the proposal, saying Roslindale Square needs more density - more people living there to support the stores there.

"Density is what makes a neighborhood safe and what makes a neighborhood healthy," he said. Young folks today, he said "want to be in the city; they don't want to have a car."

Ross, himself a lifelong Roslindale resident, predicted Marino's proposal is only the first of a series in which building owners in the square will seek to rebuild the upper floors that were torn down decades ago. The commercial district is zoned for three-story buildings, and Porteleki pointed to Wallpaper City and the building Judy Leon's is in as buildings originally put up with three floor.

Steve Gag, who recently stepped down as chairman of Roslindale Village Main Street, also supported the project. But he agreed with residents the ZBA should defer action to give residents more time to get answers to their questions. Two residents, one an architect and one a construction manager, said the rough drawings Ross brought were hardly enough on which to have a serious discussion about the merits of the building and construction method.

The project needs ZBA approval because it is slightly more than four feet higher than the 35 feet allowed under zoning, has a higher floor-area ratio than zoning calls for and provides no parking spaces.

Although the zoning board often defers hearings when city officials raise community-input concerns, as the mayor's office and McCarthy said they will do on Nov. 25, it does not have to. In fact, city councilors demanded a meeting with board members after the board approved a project the mayor and two city councilors were not ready to recommend.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

"Density is what makes a neighborhood safe and what makes a neighborhood healthy," he said. Young folks today, he said "want to be in the city; they don't want to have a car."

I don't want to have a car but unfortunately I have one and so will most of these new residents. I'm sick and tired of politicians and developers saying new residents will not have cars so they can get away without providing ample parking for all of these new condo's.

up
Voting closed 0

What makes you think that most people will choose to have a car? I've been in Boston for a year shy of a decade and have not had a car-- even when I worked in Woburn-- nor do I want to have a car. Driving in the city is awful. Parking is awful. Insurance is expensive. Fuel is expensive. Biking gets you to the same place in roughly the same amount of time. Why then, would most people choose to have a car?

up
Voting closed 0

Because if you live in Roslindale you pretty much need a car. This isn't New York City, and our public transportation is lacking. Have fun on the bike from December to April.

up
Voting closed 0

Been said elsewhere in this discussion already, but Rozzie Square is not the same as Metropolitan Hill - you can get by without a car there. Yes, it would be awesome if the Orange Line didn't end at Forest Hills, but even in heavy traffic, Forest Hills isn't that far away thanks to all the bus lines that funnel onto Washington Street.

And if you insist on going to Roche Bros. instead of the Village Market, there are Zipcars at the Alfa gas station.

up
Voting closed 0

There are also Zipcars at the upper commuter rail lot, directly across Robert Street from the new residential building where the gas station used to be.

up
Voting closed 0

You can get by without a car for sure - I do - and I'm grateful for the many bus lines. But let's be honest. On at least a weekly basis, I experience being turned away from a bus because it's too full (or seeing others turned away from the bus I'm on, and feeling guilty because I'm only going to Roslindale Square and they might need to get to Walpole or Dedham or wherever), or being crammed up against the driver on a completely packed bus. This can happen anywhere between 5-9 p.m. (After 9, you're stuck standing around waiting for a bus to show.) So it's not only an issue of having parking assessed, but having MBTA options assessed as well - a T stop might be a distant dream, but a Roslindale-only bus route - or even having an articulated bus for even one of the Washington St lines! - shouldn't be.

up
Voting closed 0

I tend to take the 34/34E/40 a couple of times a week and it's always amazing how crowded they are even in relatively off hours during the day.

up
Voting closed 0

I can go station door to Cummins Highway in 18, so results vary.

Still, most people will only tolerate a 5 to 10 minute walk, so it would be nice if they could straighten out the routes. My hint is to avoid the 34/36 routes and go further back to the 30/51/40/50 berths. Those see only a fraction of the riders. And thank God you don't live off of Hyde Park Ave. Those buses are always a mess.

up
Voting closed 0

Trust me, I have ridden every bus route. And I make the walk to/from Forest Hills often, something I don't see many other people doing. But sometimes it's freezing, raining, or snowing. Or you're carrying bags. Or it's dark and late, and you are not comfortable with a long walk alone down Washington St. And some people can't tolerate more than a 5-10 walk because they are elderly, disabled, has a stroller, or whatever else. The supply just does not meet the demand during rush hour.

up
Voting closed 0

Here's my 1 point plan for a thriving Roslindale:

DMU service from Rosi to Forrest Hills. Every 30 minutes other than when in conflict the commuter rail.

That's it. Then we let people live 'downtown' without cars and we let new businesses open with a minimum of interference.

Rail nerds- is this beyond pie in the sky or could this happen with sufficient community/political will? The line isn't used by freight or Amtrak so why not?

up
Voting closed 0

Being the low scale transit geek, I watch my gaps in time between buses at the Square. When it goes more than 10 minutes, you could probably fill a bus between the 3 stops I frequent- Corinth Street, Washington St. at Poplar, and Washington Street at Cummins Highway.

And yes, those are the rare mornings when I say "screw it" and hoof in inbound. Outbound is a given. It has to be too rainy, too humid, or too many unshoveled sidewalks.

up
Voting closed 0

Except that the masses tend to huddle around the 34 and to a lesser extent the 36.

Way, way, way back in the day I used to take the bus out at 9:30 PM. The 51 and 36 were scheduled to leave at the same time. I NEVER took the 36, and even if the 51 left later, it would pass the packed 36, usually at Archdale.

I wouldn't worry about the time of day when walking. Despite my memory of the double homicide, it's a safe road. Just don't talk on the smartphone while going home. But yeah, walking isn't a solution for all. It does amaze me seeing how many cyclists are commuting, which you see while walking the route. Of course, it is great to walk by stopped traffic if you hit things at the right (or for the motorists wrong) time.

up
Voting closed 0

It's happened to me a few times over the years during evening commute - traffic backed all the way to forest hills - I get off at first stop and walk all the way to rozzie square faster than everyone else. if we had hubway in the square and at forest hills, I wouldn't bother taking the bus - except washington street isn't exactly fun to bike down...

up
Voting closed 0

Oh, it's fun enough. I like to count all the buses I pass in that mile that should be an Orange Line extension. I often can pass more than ten buses during the evening rush.

up
Voting closed 0

I would probably use it 3 days a week on average, but the flow would be too one way for it to make sense. On the other hand, a cheap bike from Toys Are Us would proavy cost a few year's hubway membership and ride better.

Surprisingly, few bikes out today. My later commute tends to have more.

up
Voting closed 0

Every time it's studied, car ownership is dropping. It's a fact.

up
Voting closed 0

So is the labor force participation rate. Modest job growth hasn't kept pace with population growth. Maybe people would like cars but cat afford them because they don't have jobs.

up
Voting closed 0

Labor force participation is dropping due to retirement. Retirees already own cars.

up
Voting closed 0

I can proudly say I have not owned a car since 1998... over 15 years. And I seem to manage OK.

up
Voting closed 0

Well, I've got two cars and live in Eastie. Granted, they are both parked in off street parking lots. None the less, there is a serious parking issue with the developments that have been presented across the Boston neighborhoods. Most of the developments aren't even coming close to a 1-1 ratio. Most neighborhoods are combating this with strict resident parking restrictions.

up
Voting closed 0

There's a difference between something right on top of the subway and bus lines in Maverick Square and other parts of the neighborhood, no?

Where we live in Roslindale, out where the deer and the antelope (well, deer, anyway) roam, we basically have no choice but to have a car: The nearest store of any kind is almost a mile away (and it's uphill both ways, and, no, I'm not joking).

But Roslindale Square, with all those bus lines and the commuter rail right there? It's an urbanish area, the sort of place where you might actually attract the sort of young professionals who do not want a car at all and are content to rely on Uber and Zipcar. It's a foreign concept to those of us of a certain age or who didn't grow up in, oh, I dunno, Manhattan, but it's a real trend.

up
Voting closed 0

You nailed it. There's a generational difference here that needs to be respected. I see it with my 30ish friends who would prefer to not have cars, and my older relatives who can't understand how to live without one (and both sides live in the city proper). It doesn't help persuade people to say [paraphrasing] "well I've gotten by without a car, so why can't you." As was said by numerous pro-density folks at the meeting - "change is hard." Those of us that understand the benefits of increased density for the businesses, community, and environment need to calmly educate our neighbors on it and have patience. We know this is the way developments are headed so let's bring people along with us. We won't convince everyone but outside of hardliners, it can be done to everyone's benefit.

up
Voting closed 0

The reason we're in rozzie is because we don't want to be completely dependent on a car and it was the closest (safe, walkable) neighborhood to downtown we could afford. Adding density to the square means that a greater diversity of businesses could survive there - especially the kinds of places we tend to frequent.

My biggest concern right now is being able to bike places with my child - it would make our lives a lot easier if there was a separated bike path up to forest hills... washington street is scary and in really rough shape. it's the only reason I don't bike with my kid.

up
Voting closed 0

1:1 is the MAXIMUM ratio of parking to housing units I think is reasonable. I'd love for it to go lower for new development.

See also this Buzzfeed article (yeah, I know, but it's actually good) on the issue of parking:
www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/the-hidden-reason-why-rent-is-so-expensi...

If you're concerned about traffic, you definitely want to decrease the amount of available parking. If you're concerned about the price of housing, you want to decrease the amount of required parking. And increase the amount of housing. It's not that complicated and it's incredibly frustrating that the knee-jerk reaction of most people who show up for these sorts of meetings is "no development! no traffic! no new neighbors!"

It's great to live in this city. Why do residents make it so hard for people to come here?

up
Voting closed 0

I wish Boston would decide which side of the car fence it wants to be on. There are some organizations and user groups to which I used to belong when I had a car that I simply don't bother with anymore because they only meet one out of three times in Boston itself.

I've lived in both NYC (Manhattan) and Boston. In Manhattan hardly anyone has a car so there's never a situation where something is arranged where people can't get to it without one. In Boston, many people have cars so often events which claim to be Boston-based are actually often hosted out in some commuter wasteland like Burlington that technically, you can get to on public transportation, but only if you're willing to add a couple hours on either side of the meeting to accommodate the commute as well as getting yourself the miles from where you'll be left off. (Or you could pay $40+ bucks to rent a Zip car for every meeting.)

At least places like this are making the decision clear.

up
Voting closed 0

" they can get away without providing ample parking for all of these new condo's."

All of those old buildings that were built before mandatory off-street parking zoning still have plenty of people who want to live in and near them. We shouldn't make it illegal to build more like them.

up
Voting closed 0

Otherwise nothing is going to get built without paying the pound of flesh that is more parking. And everyone pays for that, even if they do not use it.

This is the big picture on a small scale. Perhaps "we" can look at this as a neighborhood. The last thing we need is more cars here.

up
Voting closed 0

those worn out painted lanes aren't enough.

really we need an orange line stop, but I'm not holding my breath for that one.

up
Voting closed 0

I used to live in Mssion Hill, JP and Fenway - all with a car and without parking. Why can't we do that here in a few cases? Short bus ride to Forrest Hills, tons of buses outside the door, Commuter rail, Zipcar, etc... I don't see the deal breaker. Max 8 cars on Washington, Cohasset, Poplar, and Kitteredge and probably less. Disclosure - I live on one of those streets. 'Downtown' apartments are more likely to attract residents without cars IMO.

I'm less sympathetic to the people at the meeting insisting that they should always be able to drive to the square and get parking. Again, there's the commuter rail lot, BoA lot, lot behind Citizens and all the street parking.

up
Voting closed 0

It is the local residents who will be affected by new residents permanently parking vehicles. These vehicles are unlikely to use the 2hr street parking or the commercial lots for storing vehicles. They would certainly use any street that offers free 24/7 parking though.

Again, I really agree, there is plenty of space available. It will certainly be interesting to see how the street parking resident impacts this project.

up
Voting closed 0

What I mean by this, is what gives me reason to claim priority for the spot in front of my house? Actual parking spaces are expensive, so if we are going to mandate their inclusion in new construction, why do those of us currently using the street get it for free?

up
Voting closed 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx8LAFSY3Ws

It comes down to "squatters rights" and the whole rpp system. Works great until you hit your first space saver (or South Boston). Welcome to the rabbit hole. Feel free to dig.

up
Voting closed 0

If we set aside existing housing stock as with "free parking" while demanding paid for parking on anything new, we have established a subsidy for one segment of the housing market at the expense of another. The problem isn't cars, it's subsidy and market distortion. We can't fix this until we recognize the real issue. People who want cars should have them, but we should all pay the same rate for storage. Instead, we want to take the seemingly easy route by off loading this expense on new developments.

up
Voting closed 0

This populist rhetoric is great because it actually makes a lot of sense. However, there are political realities surrounding existing free parking that would be very difficult to take away. Lets be Frank Underwood for a second, do you want to be right or do you want to get things done?

With a little creativity and consideration, there are arrangements where everyone can win (and things will get done). "We" should take steps to reconcile that by developing market price initiatives (such as parking benefit districts), now. Longer we wait, the more difficult it will become to unwind the current status quo.

Otherwise, my bet is that the focus of future development will revolve around "not enough parking", "to much traffic" and "to dense". Probably will increase the cost of getting things done, and no one will get what they want.

I would prefer the condition where everyone wins.

up
Voting closed 0

The community meetings are fine, but let's say that the zoning board approves this project after the next meeting with the parking as currently planned. Then the apartments get built and the community strikes back by.... voting for someone other than Tim McCarthy or Marty Walsh? What are the political realities in the end? People get mad then move on.

People seem to think the opportunity to speak out equals an actual specific authority to impact a situation and I'm don't think that's accurate. I'd argue that's ok as these meetings are a self-selected slice of Roslindale, not a representative body.

up
Voting closed 0

The ZBA has shown it doesn't always care what city councilors say (which is why McCarthy brought up the issue last night), and neither Marino nor Ross would publicly agree to ask for a deferral themselves, so it might be interesting to see what happens on the 25th.

up
Voting closed 0

Thanks for the detailed write-up. I like what Joe Porteleki had to say, and I think the focus needs to be on how to get the most people to see how this construction might be a positive for Tony and Charlie, along with their customers. My biggest concern is that the construction process not disrupt on-going business on the first floor. That's important, but if it can be worked out in such fashion, long term, it would be good to move Rozzie back toward what it once was, which is to say more urban, more bustling. These are the features that have drawn so many to seek homes near the square. To keep that momentum we need to increase the housing stock or face pricing people out, while watching businesses struggle with not quite as large a customer base as could potentially reside here.

up
Voting closed 0

I support the project as long as it doesn't affect Redd's or Tony's. Parking? even if some of these folks have cars - there's plenty of parking around - for example - Cummins is completely vacant at night. If parking were an actual issue we'd have meters in the square.

up
Voting closed 0

Those two look like a WWF tag team from the 80s.

up
Voting closed 0

...was much closer to "You shut up Deb, while I'm talking!" The room reacted very negatively to that, and a few seconds later, the reps from the mayor's office and Mr. McCarthy interceded and calmed things down.

The rest of the meeting was fairly polite, if filled with an undercurrent of discontent.

My impression is that while there were certainly people there who were outright oppposed to the idea of adding more height to buildings in the square, there were also many people who see the merits of increased density - if achieved thoughtfully.

However, it seemed nearly everyone in the room was unhappy with the last-minute nature of the 'community input meeting' and the very hand-wavy presentation by Mr. Marino's lawyer. He did not have answers to very basic questions about the project. He tried to assert that a casual conversation with Tony and Deb D. eighteen months ago constituted a 'meeting'. He claimed an architect - not a structural engineer - had determined that the building was suitable for the additional floors after a 15 minute inspection of the basement.

Quite frankly, I do not think Mr. Marino expected anyone to show up to tonight's mtg. And I think the people there could tell - and it upset a lot of them (full disclosure - yes, myself included).

up
Voting closed 0

Acting like a creep and a bully at the proposal meeting is an indicator for how the actual development process would go.

up
Voting closed 0

Partly because, um, WTF? But also because Tim McCarthy showed up at just that moment (he'd been downtown at some hearing) and managed to grab control of the meeting before a brawl broke out (Marino was quite expressive with his hands as he was steaming).

up
Voting closed 0

I was at the meeting as well and will back up this account. Marino's outburst at Tony's wife Deb was completely uncalled for and was "shut up!" I do not know why he thinks he can speak to someone like that, nevermind a long-standing tenant and respected business owner. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and hearing from him in a public forum. And it's too bad, because I agree that this was by and large not an anti-density crowd like you sometimes see in other meetings. A number of prominent community people spoke and were supportive of the idea of more density in the square and understand the benefits. Some close-by residents did speak up about the parking congestion on their streets but this was not a rabid NIMBY crowd in my opinion, maybe with a couple inevitable outliers. I think most were more than anything taken aback by Marino's behavior, the last-minute nature of the meeting, and lack of project specifics. Councilor McCarthy thankfully did take control of the meeting and was right to do so when he did before it got really ugly.

up
Voting closed 0

I think the next meeting will have more attendees and we'll see to what extent the people who didn't speak are pro/anti-density. When the first two women spoke against 'the precedent' of having multi-story buildings, I felt like the majority of the audience was supporting them but we'll see.

Personally, I didn't feel the need to speak for density as Joe and the RVMS guy both spoke to that point and it didn't seem exactly on point to the building in question.

Who was supposed to be in charge of that meeting?

up
Voting closed 0

As long as he's got his guy at City Hall, he can do whatever he wants.

Oh, wait...

The sad thing is, if he did things the right way and played well with others, this could be a no brainer. Instead he isn't using his brains.

up
Voting closed 0

How old is Marino? Looks like he's trying a little too hard. 80 is the new 18?

up
Voting closed 0

Isn't Marino the same guy who owns the new-ish condo/commercial building on Belgrade? And the building by Staples?
I'm still waiting for the fancy Welcome to Roslindale sign he promised on Belgrade.

up
Voting closed 0

I mentioned that development earlier.

All told, it's a good building. The thing that frosts me is that last winter they ignored clearing the sidewalk of the parking lot across the street. The parking lot was bone dry, but apparently their plow guy couldn't be bothered to run the plow those last 5 feet.

As for the sign, it's up by Adams Park, with his benefactor's name on it.

up
Voting closed 0

There is the building on Washington, but Marino also built the one on Belgrade by the Belvue train station. It has store fronts on the first level and residential units above. Quite a nice building, so far as I can tell. I think there is also meant to be a Welcome to Roslindale sign on Belgrade Ave., close to the location of this second building.

up
Voting closed 0

Vinny promised a memorial plaque at the site of his new condos (7 yrs ago) on Cliftondale St where the old Bethlehem Lutheran Church stood for over 100 years. The cornerstone did manage to get built into the stone wall but no plaque to remember the poor little church which was one of the first Lutheran churches in Boston I'm told (now). The new owners of the property where the plaque was to go had specific ideas about how the plaque was to sit on the their stone wall. Vinny's (ahem) project manager apparantly did not want to work with them regarding their ideas. Still waiting for the plaque on Cliftondale St., Roslindale.

up
Voting closed 0

It is a nice building. Of course, I want the Rozzie sign right at the Parkway, so the boundary is set in stone before the evil empire to the southwest gobbles up more territory.

He builds good things. If only he could either be nicer or step out of the way and let someone nicer put a happy face on these things, things would go much better.

up
Voting closed 0

that sidewalk is NEVER plowed, and usually turns into a frozen moonscape of jagged gullies. He should be fined

up
Voting closed 0

taught a citizen's school design course at the irving a few years back using the "Subway" parcel...kids did a good job...looks like these guys could use some help from my 6-7th graders..

up
Voting closed 0

The issue is not If people CAN take public transportation, it is if they WILL take it. To build 8 new apartments without a single parking space seems greedy, and inconsiderate to neighbors. I don't object to the 8 new apartments on principle - seems like a nice idea for the Square. But even now some folks drive to Roslindale and park their cars on the neighborhood streets for the day, and hop on the T. Also, some Rozzi folks cannot take the T. Maybe they work out of the city like my spouse, or need a car occasionally for work. We can't prohibit those folks from moving into the apartments. Who wouldn't want to move to Roslindale!!?? ...and how about a few Affordable units?

up
Voting closed 0

Don't rent one of the 8 apartments. Kerpan has excess space at his place, and I've got so much parking around where I live that people think there's no parking in places where it is allowed.

Honestly, if I were looking for a place and I had a car, I would be looking for a place with parking, or at least a decent supply of parking on street. Were I looking for a place walking distance to shops (including a supermarket) and restaurants, with excellent transit connections and I want neither to own a car nor to pay the rents charged in the South End or JP, these might be a good option.

That said, were Vinny smart, which I sometimes doubt, he'd work out a deal with the Bank of America or whoever owns the BoA lot to allow parking evenings and week-ends for his tenants.

up
Voting closed 0