Great Moments in Project Delay.
By Jim Conley • Apr 10th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
The TAB has a story up on the discovery of new asbestos at St. Aidan’s which is just bizarre, as in this passage:
[The developer for the Archdiocese] said demolition could still begin as early as tomorrow, depending on how much abatement is required.
The demolition delay, which is not related to the new asbestos, has frustrated neighbor…
Not related to abatement? Now the divorce between that and demolition had to be a point made by the Archdiocese. So, if the delay is not tied to the discovery of new asbestos, that means the demolition would have gone on despite the new material?
What other reason—other than abatement—could there be for a delay? It’s the wrong day on the Liturgical Calendar?
This is why 75 residents sued the Archdiocese and the Town — to protect themselves from demolition and building on the cheap. And it looks to me more the reason why the Archdiocese and Town gagged the same 75 residents from further challenging them before settling the suit (after threatening expensive proceedings against all plaintiffs).
Just the beginning…
Update: No demolition this week, according to Brookline Planning Director Jeff Levine. I asked Levine (yesterday) to release the readings from the (woefully inadequate) air monitors in place at the site. He doesn’t respond. It’s not like he’s put $6 million of public funds into the project or anything. Oh wait, he has.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
I read this article and thought it unusual that there was no reference to regulatory involvement, such as Brookline’s Health Department, or Jeff Levine who seems to be the Town’s point person on this project, or the State DEP. For example, was there a requirement that the contractor file a removal and disposal plan for the asbestos abatement? If so, was it filed, and if not filed, why not? The article made no references whatsoever to Town officials, elected or appointed. It would seem that a Town official should have been involved. What reassurances do the neighbors have that the asbestos abatement in being conducted in a lawful and healthful manner?