This artist’s rendering depicts Stonewall Audubon Circle, a proposed 55-and-over community for gays and lesbians near Fenway Park in Boston.
Negotiations over the height of a proposed gay retirement community near Boston’s Fenway Park resumed last week between the developer and the neighborhood, but both sides are still at odds.
Boston-based companies Abbott Real Estate Development and Stonewall Communities want to develop Stonewall Audubon Circle, which would be comprised of 59 one- and two-bedroom condominiums targeted at – but not restricted to – gays and lesbians 55 years of age and older. The project would be built on Miner Street, between Harvard Vanguard’s Kenmore Square facility and Beacon Street. Unit prices are expected to range from $400,000 to $600,000.
While residents are supportive of the concept and want housing on the site, members of the Audubon Circle Neighborhood Association have expressed strong opposition to the building’s height. City officials acknowledge that the proposal exceeds zoning regulations by 5 stories.
Last week, in an effort to reach a compromise, City Councilor Michael Ross mediated a summit between the developer and representatives of the neighborhood.
“This is all about both sides understanding each other’s point of view,” said Ross, whose district includes portions of the Fenway area. “The neighborhood seems to understand that there’s a financial breaking point for the developer and the developer seems to understand that the height limits were negotiated by the residents.”
In May, Kenneth J. Hagen, president of Sheskey Architects, the Quincy-based project designer, presented plans for a 9-story brick and glass building that would house 66 condominiums.
But following strong negative reaction from abutters, Hagen retooled the design. Under the revised plan, the building would remain at 9 stories but the number of units was reduced to no more than 60. In addition, the footprint was condensed by 7,335 square feet, the height lowered by 8 feet and the amount of green space was expanded. Despite changes in design, many residents remained opposed to the plan, saying that a less-than-10-foot concession in height is not a compromise.
Under the latest proposal, Abbott might be willing to drop the height to about 7.5 stories, according to Ross.
“Abbott is examining the economics of possibility reducing the building’s height by about 1.5 stories,” Ross said. “We need to get to ‘yes’ because this is an important project. The neighborhood and the developer both showed integrity and are operating in good faith. The residents want housing in their neighborhood, but they don’t want it at any cost.”
James F. McAuliffe, principal at Abbott, declined to discuss the details of any compromise in the making.
“It’s not going to do us any good to negotiate this through the media,” McAuliffe said. “Councilor Ross was kind enough to set up this meeting with the community and, while we did not seal it in blood, I felt the meeting was held in confidence. We will be happy to talk about it after the negotiations are complete.”
‘It’s Too High’
On Tuesday, the Audubon Circle Neighborhood Association will vote on the latest proposal. Jack Creighton, the group’s president, declined to say whether he could support the latest compromise.
“It will be up to the neighborhood to decide,” he said. “My sense is that their proposal to limit the building’s height to 75 feet [7.5 stories] goes a long way to resolve the objections and is worth serious consideration.”
But at least one association member said the building is still too tall. Barbara McKinley, a Park Drive resident who serves as association treasurer, said the developer must make the building a lot shorter before she could support it.
“I would not vote for 7.5 stories and I can’t imagine the association would support it either. It’s too high. Even 6 stories is pushing it when you consider the area is zoned for 4 stories,” McKinley said. “Abbott knew about the zoning limits when they bought the building. If they paid too much for it so that they have to build such a tall building to make a profit, then shame on them.”
McKinley reserved her sharpest criticism for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, the city’s planning agency that would have to approve the project before Abbott applies for a special permit to build.
“The BRA has been trying to force this [project] on the neighborhood by failing to provide us with much notice of meetings and by being extremely surprised that we get as many people out as we do,” she said. “The last public hearing had just a few days’ notice.”
The last public meeting on Stonewall was held on Sept. 14. The notice for the session appeared in The Boston Courant on Sept. 9, giving residents less than a week’s notice.
Lucy Warsh, a BRA spokeswoman, said the agency would not make a determination about whether to approve the development until negotiations between the neighbors and the developer are complete. Warsh insisted that there has been an extensive community process that is still ongoing.
If approved, the development would be the region’s first active-adult community for gays and lesbians. The concept was launched in the 1990s when William J. Laing, a real estate developer, moved to Florida to retire. Laing, then in his 70s, could not imagine living in a “straight” nursing home where he would have to live “in the closet” during his elder years.
Instead, Laing sold most of his assets to purchase 30 acres of farmland in Palmetto, located on Florida’s west coast near St. Petersburg and Sarasota. The Palms of Manasota, which he calls “America’s First Gay and Lesbian Retirement Community,” consists of single-family homes, duplexes, triplex villas and an assisted-care living facility.
