|
June 16, 2005
May
12, 2004 (Bedford Online)
Letter - 2004
February, 2004
Letter - 2003
April 11, 2002
May 9, 2002
June 6, 2002
August 8, 2002
The Editor -
The Minuteman
According to Land Court Judge Leon Lombardi, the case against the
AvalonBay project in Bedford was the first to bring evidence of
the risks of mosquito-borne diseases into his courtroom. He heard
testimony from Dr. John Edman, now at the University of California,
but formerly a University of Massachusetts professor who had studied
Commonwealth mosquitoes for 22 years, that the drainage design
and the population density of the AvalonBay project will attract
new mosquito species to Bedford. These features of the project
pose special public health risks because of its proposed location
adjacent to Bedford’s Atlantic White Cedar Swamp, known to
breed mosquitoes that transmit Eastern Equine Encephalitis Virus,
and probably West Nile Virus. Professor Dickson Despommier of Columbia
University School of Public Health, the expert witness hired by
AvalonBay, agreed with Dr. Edman.
The public health issues are complicated, and science has failed
to provide hard statistical evidence to quantify the increase in
health risks associated with land development near known mosquito-breeding
wetlands. If the AvalonBay project is built as proposed adjacent
to a White Cedar Swamp, and surrounded by grassy wetlands, it will
provide an ideal opportunity for a public health agency such as
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to monitor
mosquito populations, the health of the residents of the AvalonBay
project, and the health of the community at large, including neighboring
Concord, Carlisle, Billerica, Lexington and Lincoln. In so doing,
the necessary statistics could be compiled to predict and prevent
future public health problems associated with domestic land development.
Such a prospective study of public health problems is a rare opportunity
and could arguably justify AvalonBay’s project because of
increased health benefits for future generations.
An analysis of the problems of predicting epidemics in a recent
issue of Science emphasizes the importance of diseases that
escape from animals into humans. Once in humans, more adaptations
by the disease-causing agent allow it to become even more infectious
to humans. Recent well-known examples are SARS and AIDS.
SARS and AIDS are both caused by viruses that have long persisted
in animals without killing them. The evidence is convincing that
the virus that causes AIDS, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV),
arose from a virus that has infected chimpanzees for many decades,
but does not cause AIDS in those animals. Efforts of U.S. scientists
to use chimps to test vaccines against the AIDS virus support
this concept because although chimps are readily infected by
HIV, and
the infection persists, the infected animals do not develop AIDS.
This is an example of a virus that jumped from animals to humans,
mutated slightly to improve its multiplication rate in humans,
and is now transmissible from humans to humans. Unfortunately,
unlike the original chimp hosts, HIV causes AIDS in humans.
SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, evidently arose from
a virus that infects Chinese civets, and possibly other animals,
but does not cause respiratory distress in those animals. Once
in humans, it mutated slightly so it could infect other humans,
and in this way resulted in an outbreak of human disease, frequently
fatal.
The same is true of West Nile Virus and Eastern Equine Encephalitis
Virus, both mosquito-borne diseases, both of which persist in
some bird populations without causing serious disease. But when
transmitted
to mammals, or to more susceptible bird populations, these viruses
cause epidemics, with significant fatalities.
Massachusetts ranks second or third in the nation in human cases
of Eastern Equine Encephalitis Virus, a disease that kills many
of its victims, and leaves most of the remainder with severe
neurologic deficit. Florida ranks first. Since 195? Massachusetts
has faced
two epidemics of EEEV, one of which was averted in 197?? by a
massive, state-wide, helicopter application of pesticide to kill
mosquitoes.
From 196? To 1981 there were __ cases of EEEV, but from 1982
to the present there have been --- cases. Mosquito experts believe
the increase is likely due to land development adjacent to White
Cedar Swamps.
Bedford has a 200 acre Atlantic White Cedar Swamp and a history
of EEEV infection, including a child in the 1980s. White Cedar
Swamps provide the specific tree-root environment necessary to
breed Culiseta melanura, a mosquito that transmits EEEV from bird
to bird. A second mosquito, such as Aedes vexans, Coquitilled pertubans…….
that feeds on both birds and humans is necessary to transmit EEEV
from an infected bird to humans. Such “domestic” mosquito
species are attracted to dense human communities, which do not
now exist in Bedford, but which would be created by the proposed
AvalonBay project. Moreover, the drainage plan proposed for the
project will provide new breeding habitat for such “domestic” mosquito
species, further increasing the public health risk.
Judge Lombardi did not disagree with the opinions of these experts,
even though in his ruling he misquoted one of them, but he cited
the “ lack .
Ann Kiessling-Cooper
Citizens for a Safe Bedford
53 Concord Rd
February, 2004: The Editor -
The Minuteman
AvalonBay’s motion for an unprecedented $870,000 appeal bond
was denied on Jan 26 by the same Judge, Leon Lombardi, who decided
that we did not prove we had “standing” to bring the
AvalonBay project to Land Court. His decision reads: “Assuming
it has the authority to require a bond..., this court considers
the appropriate test to be whether the appeal is frivolous or vexatious....
Being intimately familiar with the record of the instant action,
this court cannot find plaintiffs’ appeal to be frivolous.
Although Avalon may consider any further delay to be particularly
vexatious, plaintiffs are entitled to pursue an appeal of the judgment
to the extent permitted by law. Based upon the foregoing, the appeal
bond motion is denied.”
This decision is wonderful news not only for Bedford, but for
citizens everywhere in the nation who challenge the safety of projects
proposed
by large corporations taking undue advantage of “affordable
housing” statutes. It comes on the heels of a similar AvalonBay
defeat in Superior Court. A citizens group in North Andover filed
an appeal against a permit granted to AvalonBay by their Zoning
Board of Appeals, but that Judge also ruled the citizens didn’t
have “standing” to file the appeal. The citizens appealed
that decision and AvalonBay filed a motion for an appeal bond of
$450,000. That motion was denied by Superior Court Judge Whitehead.
Therefore, AvalonBay’s aggressive legal actions against citizen
groups have brought about two fundamentally important case laws
in Land Court and Superior Court that support the concept that
the rights of citizens to pursue appeals of judgments outweigh
business losses. This is the turning point all communities have
hoped for. It is doubtful this was AvalonBay’s intention.
From this day forward, Zoning Boards of Appeal decisions will
not be the defining factors in community land development. Flawed
decisions
will be challenged by citizen groups. We are proud to have helped
establish this important case law, and hope that Princeton Properties
takes heed, but our fight is far from over. As long as AvalonBay
insists on building the dense luxury apartment complex approved
by Bedford’s ZBA, we need everyone’s help to pursue
our appeal. If we win the appeal, Judge Lombardi will have to review
the evidence presented in court that Bedford’s ZBA overstepped
its bounds in approving the project that poses public health and
safety risks which outweigh Bedford’s need for affordable
housing. If we lose the appeal, we will appeal that decision in
Superior Court. We fully intend “to pursue an appeal of the
judgment to the extent permitted by law,” and we have a strong
case.
But we need help to continue, we must raise $30,000 by the end
of February. Our heartfelt thanks to everyone who responded to
our recent mailing by sending letters to politicians and contributions
to us. To help and/or get on our mailing list, call 275-1246.
Make contributions to: Citizens for a Safe Bedford or Hemenway
and Barnes
and mail to PO Box 1028, Bedford.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper, PhD
Citizens for a Safe Bedford
53 Concord Rd
The Editor -
The Minuteman
We greatly appreciate the letters of support with contributions
to the legal costs of the appeal against the AvalonBay project.
Since these have come in the midst of the holiday season, these
responses reflect the concern of Bedford residents for the serious
safety issues associated with the project’s size and location,
and the resolve of the community to continue to defend itself.
The appeal we filed in Land Court in January, 2002, has delayed
the project for two years. After five days of testimony, Land Court
Judge Leon Lombardi decided we did not prove we had “standing” to
bring the case before him. We believe we did prove we have “standing” to
bring the case to court. With the help of Bedford residents, we
are appealing Judge Lombardi’s decision.
The appeals process could delay the project another three to
four years because two appeals are possible, the first to the Appeals
Court and, if we lose that, the second to the Superior Court. If
we win the appeal, the case goes back to Land Court for a ruling
on whether or not the serious traffic, pedestrian safety and public
health issues associated with this dense, luxury apartment project
outweigh Bedford’s need for affordable housing. The evidence
presented in court seems overwhelming that they do.
Given the strong community resistance, the cost of the measures
to mitigate some of the traffic safety problems, the increased
risk of mosquito-borne diseases
to the residents of the project and the community at large, and an additional
delay of four years, the hope is that AvalonBay will propose a far less dense
development plan with no detention ponds to provide new mosquito habitat.
More than 200 Bedford households have helped support the court
fight against AvalonBay. We are hopeful that number will increase
to at least 500. This would
lessen the burden of the legal costs to each household as well as prove to
all land developers that Bedford will vigorously and relentlessly
defend itself against
unsafe projects. Please join us. We need to raise $33,000 by mid-January or
the bull-dozers will appear in March.
If you have contributed before, please do so again and recruit
at least one other new supporter. Checks may be made payable to
Citizens for a Safe Bedford or to
Hemenway and Barnes, and mailed to Citizens for a Safe Bedford, Bedford PO
Box 1028.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper
Citizens for a Safe Bedford
53 Concord Rd
April 11, 2002
Letter to the Editor
Avalon has Scoffed at Conservation
Bedford Minuteman
According to Gene Clerkin, in a letter to the Minuteman last week,
the Bedford Housing Partnership hopes "...to reach at least
10 percent affordable housing within the next three years. We currently
have 4,621 households of which 5 percent qualify as affordable.
We have 216 affordable units in the pipeline, including 139 from
Avalon at Great Meadow, 14 from the Village at Concord Road, 60
from the VA Hospital Shelter for Homeless Veterans, and three from
the Bedford Housing Trust. Once the current pipeline receives building
permits, we will be at 9 percent affordable housing, and approximately
50 units short of our goal."
This statement misrepresents Avalon-at-Great-Meadows which is 104
luxury apartments and only 35 "affordable units." A quirk
in the Chapter 40B guidelines may allow all 139 units to be credited
against Bedford's "affordable housing quota," but this
does not balance actual housing needs. A year ago, during an April,
2001, public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals, Gene Clerkin
outlined Bedford Housing Partnership guidelines, and commended AvalonBay
for being a responsible developer acquainted with Chapter 40B procedures.
Perhaps in response to this public support, AvalonBay pledged $100,000
to the Duplex Task Force for a "buy down" of an "affordable
housing duplex" if their project goes forward. But in the interim,
AvalonBay has not upheld Gene Clerkin's views about responsibility.
They have not designed the project to mitigate the serious safety,
health and environmental problems revealed during the review process.
At the same April, 2001, public hearing, Selectman Joe Piantedosi
introduced a letter from David Henley, Mosquito Control Program,
which expressed concerns about the project's proximity to the White
Cedar Swamp and mosquito-borne diseases. Those public health concerns
were again highlighted at a meeting in October, 2001. They have
not been addressed. The proposed site also abuts sensitive wetlands,
among the "10% most valuable in Bedford" according to
an environmental study. AvalonBay consistently ridiculed the Conservation
Commission's concerns during the public hearings, and has now appealed
to the State to overturn Bedford's ConsCom's Conditions for the
project. Moreover, the serious traffic and pedestrian safety problems
with proposed entrances/exits on Concord and Davis Roads, both far
too narrow and unsafe for such a large development, also remain
unsolved.
Because this project would be a disaster for Bedford, we filed an
appeal in Land Court. AvalonBay's aggressive response to our appeal
may have already cost them more in legal fees than their pledge
to the Duplex Task Force. They have deposed us for many hours and
researched our backgrounds in detail, suggesting an unlimited legal
budget for defense of this luxury development. If this project is
to go forward in Bedford, a safe location needs to be found, because
with the support of Bedford residents, we intend to defeat the current
proposal in Land Court. It will take considerable effort, but we
believe that the serious health, safety and environmental problems
with the proposed location clearly outweigh Bedford's need for the
35 affordable housing units.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper, PhD
53 Concord Rd
Citizens for a Safe Bedford
May 9, 2002
Letter to the Editor
Battle against Avalon continues
The Bedford Minuteman
Our thanks to the dozens of Bedford residents who have contributed
to the legal fund for the appeal against Avalon-at-Great-Meadows.
Some residents have contributed more than once, obviously because
they recognize that by working together, Bedford can provide affordable
housing without the safety, health and environmental risks posed
by the large AvalonBay project off Davis and Concord Roads.
Four of us have now been deposed for hours by a team of AvalonBay
attorneys. As the fourth deposition progressed, in the opulent conference
room of AvalonBay's Boston law firm, Goulston and Storrs, located
at Rowes Warf, it became apparent that AvalonBay feels threatened
by the notion that Bedford as a community is opposed to the location
of this project and is determined to maintain control of its community
planning.
The AvaalonBay attorney repeatedly fired questions at the youngest
member of our appellant group about the fund-raising flyers we have
circulated, which were forwarded to him from New England Nurseries
and Old Colony Homes. His questions about the flyers were aggressive
as if they represented Civil Disobedience against AvalonBay, which,
in many respects, is colonizing Massachusetts. According to state
records, the Virginia based company has built two communities, assumed
ownership of three communities, and proposed building nine more
communities with state support. Like the colonialists of yore, this
has been highly profitable. According to their website, AvalonBay
was the most profitable Real Estate Investment Trust in the US in
2001.
They maintain a cadre of salesmen, engineers and attorneys well
versed in Massachusetts Chapter 40B affordable housing law, originally
intended to provide state financing to developers willing to limit
profits in order to ensure housing for persons of all incomes in
all Commonwealth communities. The concept is good. What was not
anticipated was that developers would take advantage of weaknesses
in the law to build highly profitable luxury projects in violation
of local zoning laws.
A form of rent control on 25% of the units qualifies the entire
project for Chapter 40B financing. Objections by local zoning boards
are generally overturned by the Massachusetts Housing Authority
because of the "presumption" that meeting quotas for affordable
housing is more "consistent with local needs" than are
community zoning laws. Fortunately, the law clearly states that
affordable housing quotas do not outweigh health, safety and environmental
concerns, which form the bases for our appeal against the Concord/Davis
Road location.
We anticipate establishing a Land Court Case Law precedent that
"affordable housing" should be especially free of health,
safety and environmental problems in order to protect lower income
persons.
It is true that a contribution from every Bedford household may
be needed to ensure our successful opposition to this new form of
Colonialism. Checks made payable to "Hemenway and Barnes"
may be mailed to Citizens for a Safe Bedford, PO Box 1028, Bedford.
The ongoing support from Bedford citizens suggests that this year's
Pole Capping ceremony commemorated Bedford Civil Disobedience against
modern day Colonialists as well as those of yore.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper, PhD
53 Concord Rd
safebedford@stersol.com
Back to the Top
June 6, 2002
State not takingWest Nile serious enough
Guest Commentary
The Bedford Minuteman
An outbreak of Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) or West Nile Encephalitis
(WNE), terrible brain diseases carried by mosquitoes, would devastate
Bedford. In addition to the tragedy for the victims and their families,
the value of living, working and doing business in Bedford could
decrease dramatically.
Massachusetts ranks second in the nation in incidence of EEE. According
to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics (www.cdc.gov),
Massachusetts reported 4 cases of EEE from 1964 to 1981, but 18
cases from 1982 to 2001, approximately one per year. Last year's
victim was a child in Canton. The cause of the more than four-fold
increase in recent years is unclear, and has occurred despite vigorous
mosquito control efforts. Adults generally die of the disease, but
some children survive, most of whom suffer severe neurologic disorders.
The incidence of the disease is undoubtedly underreported because
the test is performed only on persons diagnosed with encephalitis.
EEE virus is transmitted principally by Culiseta melanura, a long-lived
mosquito which lays its eggs in standing water in dark places such
as the root hillocks of swamp trees.
Because of their location, Cs. melanura larva are not susceptible
to standard larvaciding methods. Instead, if necessary, Cs. melanura
populations are controlled by pesticide spraying of adults. Aerial
spraying is necessary because road-side spraying has limited penetration
into swamps. Cs. melanura feeds on birds which are not usually killed
by EEE infection. This situation is similar to Yellow Fever, another
mosquito-born disease which is deadly to humans but not to the monkey
hosts which reside in tree canopies. Ironically, the limited host
range and specific requirements for breeding actually enhance the
conditions necessary for disease transmission to humans because
pockets of EEE infected birds can occur. Such pockets increase the
opportunity for other mosquitoes which bite both birds and humans,
such as Aedes canadensis or Aedes abserratus to transmit the disease
to humans.
Obviously, as noted by the CDC, the opportunity for human infection
increases as humans encroach upon mosquito breeding grounds. Bedford's
White Cedar Swamp is a known breeding ground for Cs. melanura, Aedes
canadensis and Aedes abserratus. A Bedford baby was infected with
EEE in the early 1980's, before rigorous mosquito surveillance was
established in the town. The child lived until the mid-1990's in
need of continual care. His case was studied by public health officials
who determined the cost of his care was 2.8 million dollars before
he died.
Because of the specific breeding requirements of Cs. melanura,
the water level in the White Cedar Swamp generally supports only
a spring hatching of mosquitoes. Females may lay eggs later in the
summer, but they may not hatch until the following spring when the
water rises again.
The swamp is routinely monitored by the Eastern Middlesex Mosquito
Control Program and pesticide control is carried out as needed.
Any change in the current status, such as increases in water levels,
even transient, in the Swamp, or increases in human exposure could
obviously tip the balance and result in a human outbreak.
There is no cure or vaccine for EEE in humans. If the Swamp becomes
a public health threat, it could be subjected to drainage and reclamation
practices and we could lose a valuable and rare environmental resource.
West Nile Virus is new to the Western Hemisphere. It entered New
York in 1999, killing 7 residents and hospitalizing 59 others in
only 8 weeks. The New York strain of virus was traced to Israel,
where it caused an epidemic in 2000 which infected at least 417,
hospitalized 326, and killed 35 people.
All killled victims were older than 50.
WNE entered Massachusetts in 2000 and killed a Bedford horse that
year and a Woburn man in mid-October, 2001.
The incidence of WNE in birds, horses, mosquitoes and humans in
2001 far exceeded the Massachusetts Department of Public Health
predictions. According to their website (www.state.ma.us/dph/),
a report delivered to the Public Health Council and Commissioner
Koh in April, 2001, predicted limited disease in localized areas
of the state. Surveillance mechanisms and guidelines were reportedly
in place to warn Commonwealth residents in areas of risk. The report
was seriously in error.
By October, 2001, thousands of birds had died, especially crows.
Both mosquito and bird surveillance revealed nearly state-wide spread
of disease, in sharp contrast to the Public Health predictions.
Dozens of infections in horses, including Bedford and Carlisle,
occurred and at least three people were hospitalized for weeks,
including the Woburn man who died. Many more people were undoubtedly
infected but experienced lesser symptoms because the risk of developing
encephalitis is lower with WN infection than with EE infection.
According to the guidelines presented to the Public Health Council,
we passed from Level 4 Risk Category, reported in the Minuteman
August 30, 2001, to Level 5 Risk Category when, in addition to WN
positive birds, the State Laboratory also detected positive mosquitoes
and horses. This occurred in September, 2001.
Five responses were mandated by the state Public Health guidelines:
(1) Intensify public education, (2) Multimedia press releases, (3)
Mass Department of Public Health to provide daily updates to affected
communities, (4) Special messages for areas with vulnerable populations,
and (5) Advisory information provided on spraying. We passed from
Level 5 Risk to Level 6 Risk, "Public Health Alert status"
when a laboratory-confirmed, locally acquired human case was reported.
But, the alert was not issued.
In fact, because only persons with clinically diagnosed encephalitis
were eligible for testing, it was not possible to issue state Public
Health Alerts last year. It takes a couple of weeks to develop encephalitis.
Test results were not available for a few more weeks. This is why
the Woburn man fell ill in September, died in October, and test
results were released in November. Several Massachusetts Public
Health officials were authors on the report that monitoring bird
infections better predicted human disease risk than monitoring mosquitoes.
The first WN positive bird in Massachusetts was reported mid-July.
The Woburn man fell ill within the 44-day guideline suggested by
the report, clearly a better indicator of disease risk than waiting
for a horse or human infection.
A fundamental problem is the newness of the WNE epidemic. Which
mosquitoes carry the disease is not known with certainty. Until
more is known, the safest course of action is to limit human exposure
to mosquitoes.
The lack of coordination between the Massachusetts Department of
Public Health, land development companies and environmental groups
will undoubtedly lead to more WNE deaths. For example, since many
of the WNE deaths will be birds, it isn't clear at this time whether
the Audubon Society should support or oppose mosquito control measures
on Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge.
What is clear is that new epidemics require new public health safety
measures. The public should be informed that surveillance methods
may not predict risks in time. All land development projects must
be designed to not increase mosquito-born disease risks, just as
they must comply with the Wetlands Protection Act. This is standard
practice in countries with endemic mosquito diseases such as malaria
and yellow fever. Existing Public Health laws grant Health Officials
(Commissioner Koh, 250 Washington St, Boston, 02108) and local boards
the authority to immediately impose such review processes, which
would not impact most projects. With Bedford's history and ongoing
risks, Bedford residents, businesses and town officials should demand
such safety measures before tragedy strikes again.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper, has a doctorate in biophysics, is an associate
professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School, and is a resident
of Concord Road, Bedford.
Back to the Top
August 8, 2002
Avalon Donation a Small Token
Letter to the Editor
The Bedford Minuteman
The statement "If Avalon happens then we'll be near 10 percent,"
credited to a representative of the Bedford Housing Partnership
by reporter Laura Thomas in last week's Minuteman, has disappointed
and angered the hundreds of Bedford residents who understand and
oppose the serious, unresolved problems associated with Avalon-at-Great-Meadows.
The large, luxury apartment project, proposed near the Concord Road
curve around St. Michael's Church, is threatening Bedford because
for the past 33 years, Bedford has not complied with the Massachusetts
Chapter 40B regulation that 10 percent of housing be "affordable."
Chapter 40B is a well-meaning law designed to protect the rights
of all income persons. The fact that the law is being taken advantage
of by large developers, like AvalonBay, is the very reason it is
being amended. Their large, luxury developments place an immediate
strain on all community resources because they bypass local zoning
laws. Profits from their luxury developments do not stay in the
community.
AvalonBay, the publicly traded, Virginia-based land developer, has
pledged $200,000 to the Bedford Housing Trust. Their proposed luxury
apartment project will pay more taxes to Bedford than the current
property owners. But these sums of money are a tiny fraction of
what the developer expects to distribute to stockholders. According
to AvalonBay projections, the project will immediately yield on
the order of two million dollars a year in income ($23, 390, 234
for the first 11 years). Subtracting expenses, including large AvalonBay
developer's and contractor's fees, they anticipate profits of approximately
half a million dollars a year (6,079,735 for the first 11 years).
Once the Massachusetts state financing debt is repaid, their yearly
profits will rise to three million dollars per year. The pledge
to the Bedford Affordable Housing Trust is clearly a very small
token.
Not only will the proposed project not alleviate Bedford's affordable
housing problems, but it will plague all Bedford residents with
serious safety, traffic and health problems because of its size
and location. Members of Citizens for a Safe Bedford are working
hard to eliminate the risks posed by this large, luxury development,
and ensure that AvalonBay, not Bedford taxpayers, will be held responsible
forever for all problems should part of the project proceed. Bedford
cannot afford increased flooding, traffic, pedestrian and mosquito
breeding problems. Our opposition to AvalonBay, made possible by
the contributions of dozens of Bedford residents, has halted the
project. We are eager to present this project's many, serious problems
to a Land Court Judge who we believe will be more likely to rule
against the project because of the changes in the state law. Given
the wealth of the developer, help from every Bedford household is
needed to ensure that we are fully prepared for the Land Court trial
in October, 2002. Please contact us if you wish to help: PO Box
1028, Bedford; 781-275-3471; or safebedford@stersol.com.
Ann Kiessling-Cooper, PhD
Concord Road
Back to the Top
|