This Weekend: Hoop Shoot-Out, Puppet Band, Belmont World Film Begins

By Leave a Comment

• Malaria is preventable yet claims a life every 60 seconds in Sub-Sahara Africa. On Saturday, March 21 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., you can help stem the disease’s tide by participating in the annual Imagine No Malaria’s Hoop Shoot-Out at Belmont-Watertown United Methodist Church at 421 Common St. Anyone eight-years-years and older can join in on the fun: come ready to shot as many foul shots you can make in two minutes pledging any amount of money per made basket.

The funds raised will buy bed netting which will protect a family of four from infected mosquitoes. All shooters and sponsors are welcome. No registration is needed; make your own pledge sheet and just show up. Enter through the rear doors off the parking lot. 

• Toe Jam Puppet Band will be performing at the Belmont Public Library’s Assembly Room on Saturday, March 21, from 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

• The 14th annual Belmont World Film International Film Series, “Secrets and Lies,” begins Sunday, March 22 at 7 p.m. in a new location – the West Newton Cinema at 1296 Washington St. – with the New England premiere of Ghadi, a good natured satire about bigotry and redemption that was the 2015 Oscar entry from Lebanon for Best Foreign Film. Get in contact with BFW at 617-484-3980 or egitelman@belmontworldfilm.org

The screening is preceded by a reception at 5:45 p.m. at the theater featuring Lebanese cuisine (a separate $15 admission) and is co-presented by American Friends of SESOBEL, which helps improve the quality of life and supports the families of children with mental and physical disabilities in Lebanon.

 

Letter to the Editor: Please, Don’t Vote for Me Precinct 4 Voters

By 1 Comment

To the editor:

I don’t know the best way to do this and wonder if a letter to the editor is the appropriate forum. If not, perhaps you can suggest something else. Here is what I want to say:

Dear Precinct Four voters,

My name will be on the ballot in April for Town Meeting member. Due to recent illness in my family, I will be unavailable to attend town meeting. Please vote for another candidate. I hope to have the opportunity to serve on Town Meeting another year.

Christine O’Neill

Agassiz Avenue

Sold in Belmont: An Overpriced Cape Required Owner to Take a Haircut

By Leave a Comment

Photo: A nice Cape in Winn Brook, but is it worth $789,000?

A weekly recap of residential properties sold in the past seven days in the “Town of Homes.”

• 208 Grove St. Center-entry Colonial (1940). Sold: $782,000. Listed at $729,000. Living area: 1,750 sq.-ft. 8 rooms, 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 125 days.

• 76 Hoitt Rd. Cape (1951). Sold: $700,000. Listed at $789,000. Living area: 1,659 sq.-ft. 6 rooms, 4 bedrooms, 1.5 baths. On the market: 129 days.

• 100 Lexington St., Condominium (1977). Sold: $230,050. Listed at $219,900. Living area: 756 sq.-ft. 3 rooms, 1 bedrooms, 1 baths. On the market: 37 days.

Is there an unwritten rule in Belmont that says home sellers and salespeople are required to suspend all reality when pricing real estate?

For example, a simple, clean, classic Cape on Hoitt Road, a block from the Winn Brook. A past owner made a terrible mistake by knocking down a wall to supposedly create an open floor plan – sorry, but it looks like a VFW function hall with that pillar in the middle of the room – but all-in-all, an OK place.

So what were they thinking originally listing it at $789,000? Really? Did the salesperson take a good look at the 80s kitchen, the 70s bathrooms and the 50s upstairs bedrooms? You are asking someone to pay out nearly $3,500 a month in mortgage payments (5 percent down, 4 percent mortgage) for 30 years (!) to live in a house with less than 1,700 square feet? That comes out to $450-per-square foot. That’s nuts. The town assessed the house for $632,000 last year.

That price was so out there one has to believe the seller is thinking they are living in Belmont, California where the medium house price is greater than a $1 million.

And once again, the broker/seller had to swallow hard and admit a mistake was done after potential buyers too a step back when they heard what it would cost them. And they swallowed $89,000 to a far more reasonable $700,000.

Why not price all homes at $1 million and see where it goes.

Belmont’s ‘No’ on Override Committee Warrants Attention

By 8 Comments

Photo: A generic design asking for a no vote.

It has no lawn signs (yet), nor a web site (so far) and is keeping its campaign close to the vest (for now).

But last week, a group of Belmont residents made it official: it will campaign to defeat the $4.5 million Proposition 2 1/2 override on the April 7 Town Election ballot.

But unlike former override opponents who are content with authoring missives that populate the letters page of a weekly newspaper, this ensemble – officially known as the “Vote No on Ballot Question 1 Committee” – carries far more heft than any group in the past.

A cursory glance of those identified as ‘no’ supporters quickly reveals a common core; they are or have been members of the town’s influential Warrant Committee, the Town Meeting’s financial watchdog. The ‘No’ chair, Liz Allison, was for several years its head while ‘No’ treasurer, Raffi Manjikian, is joined by the Warrant Committee’s vice chair Robert Sarno and member Jim Gammill on the ‘No’ campaign.

In addition to his work on the Warrant Committee, Manjikian was one of the prime movers in the successful 2013 effort by Waverley Square residents to pass a general residence demolition delay bylaw protecting single-family homes from the wrecking ball.

To be fair, membership on the Warrant Committee doesn’t lead one exclusively onto the ‘No’ committee. Ellen Schreiber, a leader of ‘Yes for Belmont’ which supports the override, was recently selected to the Warrant Committee by Town Moderator Michael Widmer (The moderator selects residents to the committee) while current Chair Michael Libenson has written advocating for the three-year, $4.5 million increase.

The group – which includes Sarno’s wife, Judith Ananian Sarno, and Dawn MacKerron – has been quietly flying under the radar, collecting email address and putting out the word to those who will vote against the override.

This week, the first arguments from the ‘no’ campaign has emerged in public statements by the group, less than three weeks before the election. A “guest commentary” by Manjikian circulating throughout town via email provided a glimpse at the committee’s chief arguments. (The complete commentary is here: Letters-to-Editor_drafts-2

“As a parent of four children, I try my best to lead by example. Choices sometimes may not be popular, but one needs to stand for up for what he or she believes and at times to call upon others to join in. Voting ‘NO’ on Question 1 is not a vote against the town or the school system; it is a vote against how we have chosen to manage,” writes Manjikian.

In his statement, Masjikian argues the town doesn’t have a revenue problem as stated by the Financial Task Force which recommended the override, “we have a management problem,” specifically in managing expenses, pointing to four projects residents voted to pass in the past year-and-a-half costing taxpayers $12 million.

By voting no, “[we] will open the discourse to a balanced approach toward crafting a multi-year plan that impacts both the revenue and expense side of our budget.”

Manjikian rejected claims by Belmont School Superintendent John Phelan that turning down the override would have dire consequences to the Belmont School District; reducing classes, firing teachers, greater teacher-to-student ratios and forcing more free time onto students.

“We don’t agree that a “NO” vote will have a detrimental impact of education in Belmont,” he said. “We need to put this in perspective – voters are being asked to fund a ‘Mega Override’ of $4.5 million when the draft school budget is looking for $1.7 million,” Manjikian told the Belmontonian.

“If voters reject the override ballot question, the [selectmen], [warrant committee], [school committee] will do what has been done many, many times; identify revenue opportunities and cost saving in the draft budget that will allow the critical needs of the schools to be funded,” he said.

Only then, if a gap in revenue to expenses remains, “a ‘right sized’ override should be called for to support that need,” said Masjikian.

“Going to the taxpayers as a first step is just not right. We need to bear in mind that we will be going to the voters for more tax dollars in support of the numerous capital projects among which is the high school – the  debt exclusion would be $70 million, which could be as soon as [fiscal year] ’18,” he said.

As the No campaign has begun to surface, those supporting the override believe their assumptions simply don’t hold water.

“It borders on shocking that the leaders of the ‘No’ campaign are suggesting another band-aid fix to Belmont’s long-term financial challenges,” Sara Masucci, co-chair of YES for Belmont campaign. 

“In Belmont, we love to complain about the yearly “financial crisis,” yet that is exactly what they are doing – again. Belmont’s voters have an opportunity now to change that; to take a smart, fiscally responsible and proactive approach to town management,” she added.

Masucci said the issue before Belmont voters is not “a management problem” but a culture of short-term thinking.

“Rejecting the override is just kicking the can down the road, they make no proposals to address the real issues and they reject this carefully developed multi-year solution. This reckless approach – throwing around blame and avoiding tough choices – risks Belmont’s children’s futures,” she said.

 

 

And after that evaluation if there still is a gap, a “right sized” override should be called for to support that need. Going to the taxpayers as a first step is just not right. We need to bear in mind  that we will be going to the voters for more tax dollars in support of the numerous capital projects among which is the high school – the  debt exclusion would be $70 million, which could be as soon as FY18.

 

Screen Shot 2015-03-19 at 2.22.16 PM

‘Lights’, ‘Camera’ … Belmont’s Studio Cinema Returning to ‘Action’

By 1 Comment

Photo: The Studio Cinema in Belmont.

The interior lobby just got a recent coat of gray paint. The concession counter has a new top. There are LDC billboards hung on the wall displaying ticket prices and show times. And there are posters proclaiming coming attractions such as the 2015 Academy Awards winning film “Whiplash.”

Belmont’s 96-year-old movie palace, the venerable Studio Cinema, is ready for her latest close-up.

After closing just before the New Year and after months of speculation, owner Jim Bramante said the landmark on Trapelo Road will soon be back in business.

“I’m very close to being back in operation, in about a week or two,” Bramante told the Belmontonian on Wednesday, March 18.

For the past two-and-a-half months, the future of the building at 376 Trapelo Rd. was in doubt as Bramante and a handful of Belmont town departments including fire and inspectional services sought to resolve existing structural and safety issues at the century old building. In mid-January, the outlook for one of the few remaining single-screen movie houses in the country appeared bleak as the two sides came to an apparent impasse.

But Bramante said an agreement was reached in February and work has been progressing to allow the Studio to reopen.

“I’m waiting for another final inspection,” Bramante said, saying there had been a delay in getting the operation going “as there has not been a lot of coordinating within town departments.”

While the cinema is returning, the same can not be said for Cafe Burrito, Bramante’s Mexican-inspired storefront next door to the theater that opened in September 2012 serving “Mission-style” burritos and espresso drinks.

“After a great opening, business got slower and slower until the first of the year, I decided to just shut the door,” Bramante said, noting the business climate “has been one of the worst I’ve ever seen.”

Bramante has not yet decided what to do with the site.

Town Clerk: Know Where a Political Sign Can and Can’t Be Displayed

By Leave a Comment

Photo:

Here is a reminder from Belmont Town Clerk Ellen Cushman to all residents who have or are about to display a political sign:

“The Town Clerk reminds residents that all campaign and political signs MUST only be placed for display on private property.

Specifically, the “sidewalk strip” or “tree strip”  in front of your home, as well as the delta islands, playgrounds, school grounds and parks are all public property and no signs may be placed there. 

If a campaign or political sign is being held, the person holding the sign may stand or sit on the public property to display the sign, however the sign may not be left unattended or leaning against a wall or tree awaiting the next sign holder. At no time can a person holding the sign obstruct the public’s access to the public property.

If you are out and about in Belmont and notice a campaign or political sign located on public property, please email townclerk@belmont-ma.gov or phone the Town Clerk’s office at 617-993-2600. We will contact the campaign to have the sign moved immediately or have it removed.”

Citing Precedence, Selectmen Deny Jimmy’s Food Mart Beer/Wine License

By 4 Comments

Photo: The owners of Jimmy’s Food Mart, Surinder Kaur Dhaliwal and Parmjit Singh with their attorney, Steve Rosales, before the Board of Selectmen.

Citing a precedence in opposing past applicants which failed a fluid set of criteria, the Belmont Board of Selectmen unanimously denied a license to Jimmy’s Food Mart to sell beer and wine from the store at the corner of Belmont and School streets.

“This is about fairness,” Selectman Sami Baghdady told the Belmontonian after the meeting held on Monday, March 16, referring to the board’s recent denials to a pair of Trapleo Road businesses which failed to meet a benchmark of requirements set when the board OK’ed a full liquor license for the Loading Dock on Brighton Street in May 2014.

“If we denied LC Variety and Trapelo Variety

for not meeting certain community standards, how do we approve Jimmy’s when they also failed to do so? That’s unfair to the others,” he explained.

The board’s decision now places the future of Jimmy’s Food Mart into question.

“I don’t know if we can stay open,” said co-owner Parmjit Singh told the Belmontonian after the meeting.

Singh said he heeded the board’s suggestions made by the board three weeks prior when he and his wife and co-owner Surinder Kaur Dhaliwal, first presented their application for a beer and wine license.

“We did all they asked. Why did they now reject us? The business is changed to what they wanted,” he asked Belmont attorney Steve Rosales, who represented the couple.

In their application, the owners informed the town the store would provide popular and affordable brands of beer and wine, products in demand as the four current beer and wine and full liquor license holders in Belmont are providing selections that are viewed as more selective.

“I don’t know about you, but I like,” said Rosales.

At the meeting in February, the board informed the couple it would view their license application more favorably if they fundamentally changed their business model from a corner store selling the staples and sundries into food preparation and a “market”-style operation. The meeting was continued until this Monday.

Singh and Dhaliwal bought the shuttered site of the former Shore Drug in 2013 and opened it as a convenience store in January 2014. The store is managed by their son and business partner, Jimmy Singh. Since opening, neighborhood reaction has been overwhelmingly favorable, with residents commending the owners for operating a clean and inviting business.

Hannah Haynes, who lives on Lewis Road, said Singh polices the area including keeping the sidewalk clear of snow beyond the business’ boundaries and conveniently staying open into the night.

“For someone who works late, I appreciate the light and activity the store brings to the street,” Haynes told the board.

Since the February meeting, the store has set aside a significant square footage of floor space to accommodate South Asian foods, products and fresh “to-go” foods, transforming the store into an “international” market. Singh said he has not yet created a spot to serve or consume food since he would need to obtain a common victualler license.

While praising the new business plan the board strongly suggested Singh and Dhaliwal adopt, and the owners’ decision to voluntarily end tobacco sales, Baghdady said the business, “still doesn’t feel right to me that you have lottery sales.”

“Honestly, [lottery sales] is inconsistent with your business plan,” said Baghdady, telling the owners they would “do better if you got off the lottery and focused on the ethnic food products.”

Singh told the board lottery sales allows the store to stay in operation, providing the business a small profit to soften the high cost of doing business at the site including a $4,000 a month rent in addition to other fees and taxes he must pay.

“I need the lottery. It’s very hard for me to make my money [from the store alone],” said Singh, noting that similar Indian stores in Somerville, Cambridge and surrounding areas all sell lottery tickets to customers who are from South Asia.

Baghdady would not budge from his and the board’s demand the store abandoned lottery sales, noting the “precedence” set in rejecting two previous applications.

Rosales told the board the precedence from the Loading Dock decision was if an establishment wanted a full liquor license, “then you give up [lottery and tobacco] sales.”

The pleas did not move the board.

“I clearly understand that the lottery is a revenue source, but I don’t think you have it tonight, unfortunately,” said Selectman Mark Paolillo.

In addition, the Board noted traffic issues existed on nearby Lewis Road – running perpendicular to Belmont on the same block as Jimmy’s – which could be exasperated with vehicle traffic from Jimmy’s customers.

While Lewis Road residents were critical of the parking and traffic on the roadway at the February meeting, they were nearly universal in commending the owners in their commitment to operating a neighborhood-friendly store.

“I encourage you to keep working on your business plan, expand your business and when you’re ready, then come back,” said Baghdady, suggesting a return is possible in “eight months.”

“I don’t know how they are not ready now?” queried Rosales.

The board voted to accept Baghdady’s “itemized reasons” for denying the application; “I don’t think the use is capable with that neighborhood, I think a lottery license is incapable with our previous decisions and until the Traffic Advisory Committee does take some action on Lewis Road, I think this affects traffic in the residential areas.”

When asked if the board has established a “criteria” for future beer and wine applicants must follow, Baghdady said the board’s new “guidelines” should be taken into consideration by any business seeking a beer and wine license.

“They should know what we expect from applicants,” said Baghdady.

The presence of an unwritten set of rules applying troubled Rosales, a past member of the Board of Selectmen.

“Let me just say personally, [unwritten guidelines] would have been unthinkable when I was a member of the [board of selectmen],” Rosales told the Belmontonian.

When asked to elaborate, Rosales declined with a shake of the head.

When asked if the board has established a criteria future beer and wine applicants must adhere to, Baghdady said the board’s new “guidelines” should be taken into consideration by any business seeking a license.

“They should know what we expect from applicants,” said Baghdady.

When told of the possible closure of the year old operation, Baghdady said the owners should not have based a business decision on the “hope” they would receive a beer and wine license.

“They should have made opening the business contingent on receiving a license, not the other way around,” he said.

Selectman Candidates’ Question of the Week: Mitigating the Impact of Belmont Uplands

By 8 Comments

Photo: Jim Williams.

Every Wednesday leading up the Town Election on Tuesday, April 7, the Belmontonian will be asking a “Question of the Week” to the candidates running for a seat on the Board of Selectmen: incumbent Andy Rojas and Glenn Road resident Jim Williams.

This weekly feature will allow the candidates seeking a three-year term on the board to answer topical questions concerning Belmont and help demonstrate their ability to lead the town.

This week’s question: Over the three-year term beginning on April 8, what will you do to mitigate the expected effects of the 299-unit Belmont Uplands development on town resources and the local environment?

Jim Williams

The proposed development in the Uplands is a situation where we have to prepare for the worst, and collaborate to achieve the best outcome. While it is, of course, disheartening to see the Silver Maple Forest surrounding the Uplands disappearing, there is still much that I, as Belmont Selectman, can be done to ensure that the developer adheres to 40B affordable housing regulations. The environmental impact is also of utmost concern and traffic issues must be addressed. 

We must prepare now for the impact of an additional 299 housing units will have on town resources and our already over-crowded schools.  My plan is to work with the developer and the town with the goal of ensuring the best outcome for the Uplands and the Town of Belmont. 

First, we need to determine the net cost to the town based on the number of units, number of residents, and impact on our utilities. We do not have clear estimates for the number of additional children; nor do we know how traffic patterns and congestion will impact us. It is my understanding that, as of yet, the Board of Selectmen has not run a model nor have they asked the planning board to develop a model to estimate costs of services, and look at any benefits from tax or other revenue. How can we prepare for the strains on our system if we aren’t willing to make projections?

Second, major environmental concerns are two-fold: flooding and pollution. The developer is using storm water data from 1961; when in in actuality the 2011 rainfall statistics shows 150,000 gallons in excess storm water. Not only is there a risk of flooding, the excess storm water also impacts pollution at the site.

Third, the developer needs to proactively fund and put in place certain measures to mitigate traffic. The most practical change we can implement to help with traffic would be to build the tunnel under the railroad at Alexander Avenue. This has the potential to reduce traffic on Brighton Road, one of the roads which would be most severely affected by traffic from the Uplands development.

I believe the most alarming challenge we face with the Uplands development is the sheer increase in population; which means more cars on already less-than-acceptable roads and a further strain on our town services, such as police and fire, and utilities like sewer and water and electricity.  Furthermore, our school system is growing at an unprecedented rate, and an additional rapid in-flux of students into our already overcrowded schools may push us to a breaking point.  

All of this requires fiscal discipline and diplomatic solutions to ensure that we balance the outcome of the Uplands development with our current and future needs. I have a proven track record in ensuring that the best outcomes are achieved within the parameters of our financial constraints and available revenue. My plan shows promise and potentially and optimistic outlook for the Town. Facing our financial problems head-on is the only way we are going to preserve the town we love.

Andy Rojas

As required, because all necessary state permit conditions had been met, the Community Development Department recently issued a foundation permit for the Uplands residential development; project construction will now begin in earnest. The full impact of this project on Belmont will take a number of years to be felt. However, the town must prepare for the aftermath of this unfortunate occurrence and deal with any immediate effects.

  • This is an area where my extensive site development and mitigation experience will be extremely helpful to Belmont.

Since the project is comprised of five separate residential buildings, it is likely that the impact on Belmont’s services — schools, police, fire, etc. — will be felt in waves as each construction phase is completed. However, the primary environmental impacts on flooding and habitat destruction will likely be apparent as soon as the site has been cleared of vegetation in preparation for foundation construction.

Protecting the Belmont neighborhoods most directly affected by the environmental consequences of the Uplands development will be a central theme of ongoing reviews and approvals during construction. I am committed to using my site development and mitigation expertise in helping to protect these neighborhoods.

  1. I will work with the Community Development Department and our construction control team to make sure that all construction activity adheres to the law and to all applicable environmental regulations and best practices.
  2. All environmental impacts relating to water management, stormwater control/storage and natural habitat disturbance will be monitored to make sure that the project abides by approval conditions.
Andy & Smudge Rojas - IMG_0779

Andy Rojas and Smudge.

Accommodating the Uplands’ projected post-construction requirements for town services will be very challenging. Uplands property taxes will not cover costs.

As each project phase is completed, the school-age population will increase; students must be absorbed and placed appropriately. While projections of student numbers are an inexact science, Belmont will inevitably be faced with providing quality education, transportation and perhaps additional mandated services to this larger population. I will work closely with the Schools Superintendent and the School Committee to carefully gauge and accommodate this influx from start to finish.

The Uplands’ other projected demands on town services such as police, fire and emergency response will also require constant monitoring and adjustment; much of this will happen as each construction phase is completed. Given the Uplands’ geographic location, the town departments affected may require additional personnel and vehicles to properly service the completed project.

A police sub-station within one of the buildings is a possibility. While this will be a bigger burden for Belmont, as a community, we must support the life, safety and security of our new residents.

My experience with these departments as well as with my understanding of their capabilities, needs and budgets will allow me to work with them so we can address these challenges effectively.

I respectfully request your vote for Selectman on Tuesday, April 7, 2015. Thank you.

Belmont Fire Log: An Act of Kindness for a Belmont Senior

By Leave a Comment

Outside, looking in

March 8 – Just about half past noon, a fire crew headed to a residence on Simmons Avenue to help yet another resident who found themselves locked out of their home.

Search on a cold night

March 9 – A hair before 6 p.m., Engine 1 and the Rescue truck took off towards a house on Beech Street after someone reported seeing a person in a nearby snow bank. Crews took the call quite serious as the call came from a group house for people needing assistance in their daily lives. When the firefighters got there, they couldn’t find anyone in the area. In addition, everyone at the group home was accounted for. The person who made the call told the crews that the person who he spotted in the snow had left the location.

Boiler blowout

March 10 – A couple of minutes after 1 a.m., a fire squad responded to a report of gushing water in house on Greybirch Park. The team discovered that the boiler had cracked and water was leaking out. The heating system was shut down.

Time for spring cleaning

March 11 – Just before half past 11 a.m., firefighters arrived at a Centre Avenue house after they got a report the fire alarm had gone off. Turns out workers doing renovations had kicked up enough dust to accidentally activated the smoke detector.

Going above and beyond

March 13 – It was too early in the morning, just after 3 a.m. when the dispatcher received a call from a disabled resident needing help. The Engine 1 crew arrived a cold Slade Street two-family where they found a man in his 70s sitting in a chair in the living room, a walker close at hand. The resident told the firefighters he was unsure how to use the digital wall thermostat and could the crew turn up the heat in the apartment. The firefighters showed the resident how to adjust the thermostat and waited for the heat to return. While the elderly man denied that he needed any other assistance at the moment, the firefighters encouraged him to call back when the need arises.

Major Detour on Trapelo Road on Wednesday, March 18

By Leave a Comment

Photo: A map of the detour in effect on Wednesday, March 18.

If your daily commute runs through Cushing Square, give yourself extra time Wednesday, March 18 as road construction will reduce vehicle and bus traffic on Trapelo Road to a single, outbound lane – towards Waltham – between Common Street and the intersection of Belmont Street beginning at 7 a.m.

The detour will end at 3 p.m.

As a result, inbound traffic towards Cambridge will be sent on a detour at Cushing Square going onto Common Street to Belmont Street, and re-enter Trapelo Road at the intersection of Belmont Street.

The detour will impact a single #73 bus stop, located at 36 Trapelo Rd. near Moozy’s.