Hey, there! Log in / Register
Landlord who sued to block non-profit groups from building apartments near one of his Jamaica Plain buildings sues to block non-profit groups from building apartments near one of his Salem buildings
By adamg on Sat, 03/11/2023 - 3:19pm
Landlord Monty Gold of Brookline, who owns buildings with little or no parking, has sued to try to block construction of a three-building project with apartments for seniors and a health clinic in Salem, charging the project would wreak parking, traffic and construction havoc on his tenants in a building across the street.
Gold's suit, filed in Essex Superior Court, is similar to the suit he filed in 2021 against a proposed apartment building for senior citizens next to a building he owns on Washington Street in Jamaica Plain - which led to street protests - and another suit he filed in 2020 against a proposed Pine Street Inn apartment building across the street, except instead of legally fretting about a tenant who runs a brewery, he is charging the Salem project would harm tenants who run a taco place and a bakery.
His Salem suit alleges:
The Board exceeded its authority and acted arbitrary and capriciously because it approved the special permits without a sufficient plan in place as to construction mitigation, parking and traffic.
In the suit, Gold charges construction would disrupt business at the taco place and bakery, that the Planning Board failed to insist on plans showing where construction workers would park, which means they could be taking public on-street spaces away from customers of the two businesses and that longer term, the new buildings don't have enough proposed parking to keep tenants from taking away public parking spaces from his tenants.
His suit names both the Salem Planning Board, which approved the project in January, the two non-profit concerns that proposed it and the builder that would put it up.
In his 2021 suit against the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corp. and the Boston zoning board over a five-story senior building next to Turtle Swamp, Gold charged, among other things, that construction of the five-story apartment building right up to the property line would disrupt business at Turtle Swamp Brewery in his building and that the plans would make it near impossible for 18-wheelers to use street parking to for Turtle Swamp deliveries and harder for brewery customers to find a parking space.
Gold eventually settled both his Jamaica Plain suits, after Pine Street Inn agreed to find some off-site parking for construction workers and the support staffers who will work with tenants transitioning from homelessness to apartments and after the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corp. agreed to move its proposed building five feet away from the property line with Turtle Swamp.
Complete complaint (1.8M PDF).
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Cartoon villain stuff here
How terrible do you have to be to do this twice?
The organization he’s trying
The organization he’s trying to block now built affordable housing for queer teens who’d been thrown out of their homes and provides them with job training.
My man is a Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo sub-boss.
Greed and arrogance
I can't even understand what he is trying to accomplish with this.
As this is the second time he's pulled this shit, could this be considered to be a SLAPP suit? Kind of in reverse, but still reeks of it.
The only way to defeat Monty
The only way to defeat Monty Gold is to beat him at the annual regatta so his dad takes all his money away. No boat? No problem! Some teamwork and a highly satisfying musical montage will take care of that.
Monty is terrible
I dealt with him About 15 years ago when the architectural firm did work for him at the start of a project. He turned around and hired another firm that agreed to do the work for half the cost after we did a bunch of work under good faith that we'd be hired. He's a gready and non trustworthy person I'd put in a similar category to Trump. Karma will eventually catch up with him.
Did your firm learn its
Did your firm learn its lesson and start requiring signed contracts before doing work?
Did he think in good faith
Did he think in good faith you would not overcharge him by 100%?
This thing, where a certain
This thing, where a certain sort of person tries to use lawsuits (a.k.a. money) to force any and every decision-making body they aren't part of to do what they want? It needs to stop. If Monty doesn't like the decisions of the Salem planning board, he's free to seek a board position himself. Until then he's basically no better than the crazies who kept calling in bomb threats to Children's Hospital.
But that's our system
It's a horribly inefficient system that mostly benefits the lawyers, but suing is what you're supposed to do if you think a zoning board didn't follow the law. There's no other way to appeal it.
If you don't like this system, you're free to write a letter to your legislators or run for office yourself.
If Mr. Monty actually thought
If Mr. Monty actually thought the board didn't follow the law, I would certainly agree with you. That's obviously not his real issue, though; he simply doesn't like how the board decided, and is trying to find a way to squeeze his personal disapproval in under the broadest part of the law he could find* because he wants to get a court to force his opinion on the town.
If it were the first time he'd done this he would be entitled to the benefit of the doubt from the public, but he burned through that years ago. He is who he is and nobody should pretend he doesn't have a history.
* "Arbitrary and capricious" is a very tough hill to climb for his claim; absent clear and conclusive proof that the board's decision explicitly ignored unambiguous facts that, by the letter of the board's mandate, necessitate a different decision, courts are supposed to defer to the administrative body. If you read the complaint you'll see that it contains no such references and is entirely based on this guy's personal opinion of what words like "adequate" "satisfactory" and "sufficient" mean. He's demanding specific assurances from the board, but does not identify any law that would require such assurances. It's garbage.
I sent him a polite and civil email …..
…. a few years ago expressing my objections when he was trying to pull something similar and in less than five minutes I had received a couple of rude emails back from him.
It’s like he lives to be ornery and contentious.
Why?
Why would a landlord drag his feet over a pine street inn facility being adjacent to his property?
Most large landlords in Boston are absolute scumbags but let’s not pretend he’s some comic-book villain.
Gotta read past the headline
If you want answers you need to read all of the information provided and not just the headline or comments. I don't see where this guy is trying to specifically block Pine Street Inn as he is trying to protect his rights as an abutting property and the small businesses operating next door. In the end they come to an agreement that works for both parties. Often the only way to make someone negotiate is by filing a lawsuit.
*sobs*
Won't anyone speak for the poor, beleaguered landlords pretending that they own the streets?
I see it a bit differently
If you really read and follow these suits it seems he is trying to protect his small business tenants and his property rights which we would all do. My guess is those that comment on these posts do not own property and hate those that do. It doesn't seem he is trying to block a certain type of organization as each is different. I guess some will see only the headline that he is trying to block a non-profit. Often the only way to come to a compromise is to bring a suit. In the end it seems each got what they wanted.
Two issues
First, his property rights extend well into the street? How many street parking spots are covered in his deed? How much relief is he guaranteed from 12 months of construction on a nonprofit apartment building?
Second, plenty of organizations and individuals will sing about the good they do for others to distract from their own self-interested motivations. That doesn’t mean you have to believe that a landlord suing a nonprofit housing project, for example, is in fact a blameless, honorable steward of the community.
Emac, should praise be sung
Emac, should praise be sung when abutter challenges or file against private developers? Reading passed the headlines allows others to see he also filed in the Fenway to protect the small business on peterborough st. But since it was against a private developer it was not written about
Easy now
Don't go against the evil landlord narrative with facts.
property rights
He has exactly the same "property rights" here as you and I do, because he doesn't own the street.
If his tenants need parking that badly, he can buy or lease parking spaces on private property. Or, you know, let the oh-so-wonderful free market work, and they can move to a location that does offer that amenity. The landlord doesn't own the street near his buildings, and it's not his to rent out.
ReplytoVicki
The concepts applies both ways. If construction of new buildings needs more parking they can “ buy or lease parking spaces on private property” as you describe. Why does this project / building not get the same position that they should have to provide private parking for all these people? Everyone one of Monty’s lawsuits has been logistics on construction, why was this not dealt with him ahead of time?
It could be that, like the
It could be that, like the previous incidents, that the non-profits in question (like all developers, for that matter) thought they could steam roll over any objections. Which they usually can, unless there is a suit. Once they have to deal with the suit, then they compromise. But they have no reason to do so, absent the suit.
Space Blocker?
I bet you are someone that puts a space blocker out in the winter aren't you? I mean you don't own the street do you? If you need parking so badly you can rent a spot on private property.
That’s a pretty far fetched
That’s a pretty far fetched presumption.
I once flew to CA to fire an employee named Monty
Somehow, he got wind of it in advance (not from me) and wore his "employee of the month" t-shirt the day of our site visit day.
He was actually kind enough to help me pack up his office.
Monty....
I like the cut of Monty's jib
I like the cut of Monty's jib.
can u spell
asshole?
sure, Fenway Crank. There.
sure, Fenway Crank. There.
Does anyone read anything?
The businesses at 101 Lafayette are Crave (a coffee shop/bakery), The Vapor Outlet (they’re across the street from a dispensary, guess what they sell), Spitfire Tacos, and Witch Dr. (head shop). Across the street is a Wendy’s. These locations on Lafayette don’t even abut his property: they abut the Wendy’s next door and across the street from his building. The Wendy’s has more to worry about than he does. He’s making a nuisance because he can.
Don’t feel bad for this guy. He’ll get by or he won’t by the strength of his investments.