Clearing the Air.
By Jim Conley • Mar 14th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
If it’s not apparent what the latest brouhaha over the St. Aidan’s housing project is about, let me spell it out. The church rectory is nearly a century and a half old; it’s listed on the National Register of Historic Places; and it housed the clergy who ministered to Bobby and Jack Kennedy. And, over the next two weeks, it’s going to be razed without so much as a hearing by the Brookline Preservation Commission.
As if that’s not enough, the building is laced with asbestos. But, that asbestos is a catastrophically dangerous substance to human health appears unknown to Brookline town officials. Apparently also unknown to town health officials, is that the asbestos which will be airborne during demolition will be circulating in a densely populated area (i.e., lots of lungs in the vicinity).
I say unknown, because I find it hard to believe that any person of conscience would know the scale of the risk and then allow a demolition which callously disregards public safety. I can’t fathom that a person of responsibility would act in any way other than ensuring that the utmost care would be taken to protect human health. I’d find it horrifying to believe that someone would put their own job security over another person’s well being.
Now, I fully expect a developer to be reckless when it comes to the removal of asbestos. Many builders don’t want to bear the expense of careful abatement methods. It’s why the Archdiocese wants to use the ridiculous “wet method” of asbestos removal (which actually makes things worse).
What I can’t abide is a town government that puts the interests of developers ahead of its residents. I can’t abide a government that views this project being built as coming out on top in a juvenile test of wills (read: Selectmen Allen and Daly).
The Town’s housing director rats out the plaintiffs of a lawsuit over these very issues, but never informs the neighborhood of a potential health hazard. Her boss doesn’t answer reporter’s calls on an oil leak at the St. Aidan’s site. The selectmen and the Town’s Housing Advisory Board are silent on the waste of $1 million in public funds advanced for a demo unit that the developer was told wouldn’t work.
This, after all, in a government run by “professionals”. But time and again we see anything but professional government. We see only a government whose chief enterprise is to find new ways to punish the residents. And then moan over the fact that we don’t thank them for the abuse inflicted upon us.
So, with no oversight by the selectmen the only recourse is to “starve the beast.” Forget the override, we need to get an underride campaign going in Brookline. One that cuts off the funds used to wage battle against the Brookline resident.
Call it a clearing of the air. But call it soon, before someone gets hurt.
Update: A reader sent me a copy of the e-mail sent to neighbors by Brookline’s Housing Director Fran “The Snitch” Price. No mention of demolition or asbestos abatement in her euphemistic dispatch. Why would she? Her loyalty is to the Archdiocese and their lawyers.
Update (2): And don’t forget that the Archdiocese and the selectmen essentially silenced the neighors to the project by forcing them into a settlement agreement that stipulated no further opposition to the project. The plaintiffs had to settle or face a barrage of depositions, filings and other expensive filings. That’s the regard in which they view their neighbors. Why would we expect them to care about asbestos abatement?
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
60 Minutes had a segment on Katrina trailers with high levels of formaldehyde that may have created serious health conditions for the unfortunate victims of that storm living in those trailers because their homes were destroyed. One would think there would be at least one Town employee who might blow the whistle on the St. Aidan’s asbestos issues. Is there no guilt? Is there no concern with possible consequences? Doesn’t the Health Department care? The Building Department? The Planning and Community Development Department? The two Selectmen running for reelection? Does anybody care?
Can you post the documents regarding the asbestos removal method that’s being used? I also enjoy the ad that Google placed to the right of this post…
CONTRACTOR CONSIGLI’S HOSE JOB
How much water will be used for this hose job? Who will pay the water bill? Will the water bill include the sewer charge or will the hose job be treated as for landscaping only? Or will there be a direct hydrant connection, perhaps putting the tab on the Town? And what will happen to water pressure for the adjoining neighborhood during this hose job? Will neighbors be apprehensive taking showers during this hose job? Will the BFD be standing by or perhaps assisting in this hose job? How extensive will the BPD watch be during this hose job? How many Health Department employees will be monitoring the hose job? Will face masks be provided to the neighbors for use during the hose job? Will this be the biggest hose job in Brookline history?
When gas stations have leaks, the environmental follow up includes a determination of the flow directions of ground water to determine the extent of clean-up required. With this hose job surely some of the asbestos will be dispersed with the ground water. The ground water with asbestos flow can take various routes depending upon the subsoil structure. What if any steps will be taken to determine the dispersal of ground water with asbestos? If no steps are taken, consider the roulette wheel: What neighbor’s number will come up? From the developer’s and contractor’s perspectives, the neighbor with the unlucky number may not find out s/he “won” until years later. So, can the hose job end up as a game of Russian Roulette?
Here is a recent U.S. EPA description concerning asbestos removal from the John W. MacCormick Building hear Government Center:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6427a6b7538955c585257359003f0230/e18d0eb981ebe9158525738c00662120!OpenDocument
Will Consigli’s “wet willie” procedure be similar to that described in this EPA report?