"The developer has come forward with a [new]
idea," Ward 6 Alderman Rebekah Gewirtz said at the meeting, held at the
Dilboy Post. "There have now been more ideas … and the developer
wanted to seek neighborhood feedback."

The 26 residents from an
area abutting the still-empty lot on 343 Summer St., just behind the
Veterans of Foreign Wars' Dilboy Post, remain skeptical.

Four
of the neighbors in attendance at the Sept. 30 meeting have filed
litigation against the project during the past five years. During that
time, the project has technically changed hands three times, although
it has remained within the same group of investors.

The Summer
Street property where a group known as Emerald Development planned to
build a 14-unit condominium development since 2002 has remained empty
as a series of litigation has stalled progress. A 2004 suit by abutter
Dr. Mohamed Hanif Butt found its way to the Massachusetts Supreme
Court, which ruled in favor of Emerald, now known as Dakota.

The
original plans called for the structure to reach under the foundation
of Butt's orthodontist practice, one of the several factors Gewirtz
said has kept the project in limbo for nearly a decade.

"The
reason this has gone on for so long is the developer has refused to
work with the neighborhood," Gewirtz said after the meeting.

With
the construction permit on the brink of lapsing early this year, the
Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously approved an extension at its Feb.
18 meeting. After residents called into question the erroneous
justification that it could only be renewed once, city officials told
them a recording of the meeting had accidentally malfunctioned.

While
Dakota has until March 2010 to begin work, their ongoing lawsuit
against the city over a proposed fire lane that would take down a
public shade tree continues to block progress. Gewirtz, who organized
the Sept. 30 meeting and one in April, is among the city officials
named in the suit for her efforts to prevent the tree from coming down.

In
addition to Dakota's litigation against the city, which the group used
as the justification for hardship to gain the permit extension, a
lawsuit filed March 9 by residents Carol Dempkowski, Nancy Iappini and
George O'Shea alleges the ZBA overstepped the boundaries of what city
ordinance defines as "hardship."

New plans, new concerns

At the Wednesday meeting, DiGirolamo said that aside from resolving the tree issue, "Dakota has the right to build."

"But
we're not here to talk about that project," he said. Instead, he and
developer Roberto Arista came armed with revamped designs based on a
plan unveiled in April that would include a four-story, 30-unit
condominium project on the site of the current VFW post's parking lot.
A new VFW would be built on the site Dakota currently owns, in what
DiGirolamo termed a "land swap."

The developer of the sites,
DiGirolamo said, is now known as Strategic Capital Group.
Cambridge-based Oaktree Development was presented as the likely builder
at the April community meeting but has since backed out.

Arista,
presented both in April and last week as one of the developers, is a
partner at Dakota, but said the project was now operating independently.

The
new plans call for "low intensity" commercial space on the ground
floor, which DiGirolamo said would not be intended for retail use,
although residents expressed doubt that the developer could mandate the
space not be used by retail businesses despite his assurances.

Residents
also expressed concern over both the added traffic to the neighborhood
and the 67 parking spaces that will be allotted to the condominiums.
DiGirolamo said an independent traffic study estimates the development
will generate 225 trips per day.

"This building has become
antiquated for their needs and would need serious refurbishing,"
DiGirolamo said. "This would be their new home."

Uncertain future for current VFW site

While
he said the VFW's neighbor, Winter Hill Bank, has expressed interest in
buying the other side of the building and expanding, nothing has been
finalized.

The plans still lack a fire lane, one of the central
areas of dispute throughout the history of the project. Nancy Iappini,
one of four residents who has sued Dakota over the project, asked why
one wasn't included in the revamped design.

"Don't talk around me on the fire lane issue," Iappini told DiGirolamo . "We've been at it for 10 years."

The
proposed VFW plans were also called into question by Iappini and others
concerned that windows from the bar area would be in view of people's
homes.

"None of this is set in stone," DiGirolamo said, adding
that the plans would be filed with the city by late October and subject
to ZBA approval.

Gewirtz said a third community meeting would be
scheduled for the last week of October. Most of the residents who spoke
expressed a desire for a structure of no more than three stories, and
that a scale model be presented to show how such a building would
affect the neighborhood.

In addition to Gewirtz, all four
aldermen-at-large attended the meeting, with Bruce Desmond asking
DiGirolamo to take the neighbors' concerns seriously.

"Like my
colleagues here we've been fighting this development for years,"
Desmond said. "I hope that Rich when you go to the developer that you
really impress upon them that they have to lower the scale of that
building."

Gewirtz is optimistic that the final plans would be acceptable.

"My
expectation is that this situation will work itself out in the best way
for the neighborhood," she said. "I think (Dakota)has taken a lesson
away from the situation they experienced, and my impression is that
there's a more collaborative approach."