Hey, there! Log in / Register

Brookline church sues after Boston cancels parking on a lot it owns in Chinatown

A Boston board that oversees a federally mandated limit on the total number of parking spaces in Boston Proper voted last month to forbid any more parking at a lot between Hudson and Harvard streets in Chinatown, arguing the 30-space lot violates the parking cap.

The Chinese Christian Church of New England, which owns the lot, yesterday sued, charging the commission's ruling is based more on shoddy and missing paperwork than any legitimate reason - and charges it's long had approval for the spaces, just that they were included as spaces in a second, neighboring lot the church also owns:

The Hudson Street Lot has an exempt Parking Freeze Permit for a total of 97 spaces, of which up to 30 spaces are actually located on the Tyler Street Lot. When TSS became aware of the permit situation with the Tyler Street Lot, it filed an application for a Parking Freeze exempt permit in November 2023, and the APCC held a hearing on this application on December 13, 2023. TSS also filed a separate Application to renew the Hudson Street exempt permit and the two permit applications were considered at the same hearing. While the Hudson Street permit was approved by APCC, it did not approve the Tyler Street Lot permit application.

The church was originally located on the land, but converted it into parking when it moved to Brookline. The church has long leased the lot to Tufts Medical Center for valet patient parking on weekdays - and let St. James the Greater Catholic Church on Harrison Avenue use it for parishioner on Sundays. The church also let parents from a nearby daycare use it to drop off and pick up their children.

In its suit, filed in Suffolk Superior Court, the Chinese Christian Church argues the commission, based on its own poor record keeping, directed Tufts in 2022 to file a parking-ban exemption request for the Tyler Street lot because the commission had no records it had ever had an exemption - even though, the church avers, the spaces had long been permitted.

It then rejected the request, and Tufts sealed the lot off on March 30, the church says. The church then resubmitted an application, but at a hearing in June the board allowed "lengthy and irrelevant" comments from people who wanted the lot shut, while board members declared the application was for "new' parking spaces, rather than 30 spaces that had long been allowed.

Sampan reports opponents of letting the lot re-open said the lot contributed to Chinatown air pollution and road congestion and said the land should be turned into a park.

But the church says it has no interest in selling the lot and wants a judge to overturn the commission vote as arbitrary, capricious and illegal overreach and a violation of the church's rights to due process and order the commission to grant the church the permit it needs to re-open the lot.

Complete complaint (2.4M PDF).

Neighborhoods: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

I can't say I knew it existed. I wonder if they're hiring?

up
10

You didn't know they existed because they don't do anything judging by the pervasiveness of idling in the city.

up
11

They are obviously acting as a good neighbor. If bureaucrats and do-gooders want to give them a hard time, they should do a joint venture with a New York developer and build a 30 story condo needle.

up
17

...to impose local parking regulations. The rule cited is specific to Boston, which astonishes me. I wonder who enforces it, and what would happen if the city or state decided to defy it.

The federal authority is to oversee implementation plans made by each state government to comply with regulations under the CAA. The state (and city) decided in 1976 that the Downtown Boston Parking Freeze was a good way to comply with the federal law.

Each state creates regulations that are vetted by the EPA for compliance. So non-compliance in Boston would be in violation of both state and federal regulations.

State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements in the Clean Air Act: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/sip-requirements-cl...

Sections 110(m) and 179 outline sanctions at the federal level.

For the MA SIP: Title 40—Protection of Environment CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SUBCHAPTER C—AIR PROGRAMS PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Subpart W—Massachusetts: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/part-52/subpart-W

Under an alternate history where JFK wasn't assassinated, the bill would presumably have been signed into law by a President who was from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Surface parking lots should not exist in city centers. They are an incredible waste of space. Even worse when its owned by a church and therefore they pay no property taxes. Churches are too considering they are empty all but 1 hour per week and religion continues to be less relevant every day.

A condo building would be way better. We need housing and tax revenue, not more cars from the suburbs.

up
29

… way worse that a surface level parking lot in this low income neighborhood already nearly decimated by gentrification.

up
10

While an understandable perception, this is very often not true. For instance, my church in Boston houses a soup kitchen (which acts as a place of community and connection to resources besides providing food) and two secular non-profit organizations that help hundreds of people each year with housing and workplace issues. (It also is the home of two other Christian groups and one Muslim group). We’ve also been a place of temporary shelter for people after disasters.

This all jibes with results from a study conducted by an organization called Partners for Sacred Places, and the Director of the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Social Policy and Practice which found that the average urban historic sacred place generates over $1.7 million in economic impact annually, with only 11% of visits for worship and 89% of visits for other purposes. https://sacredplaces.org/info/publications/halo-studies/.

up
17

But this is worth taking into consideration.

Even if the church only used the spaces on Sunday, it's used the rest of the week by Tufts Med for patient parking - another worthwhile use.

… as a good neighbor. The church is enabling more traffic, noise, pollution and safety hazards into a densely populated neighborhood. With no trees or vegetation, the parking lot heats up the neighborhood. From what I understand, the church doesn’t even pay property taxes on it.

up
13

The church was originally located on the land, but converted it into parking when it moved to Brookline.

This church isn't a neighbor to Chinatown residents - unless you mean it's in a "neighboring" town entirely.

up
11

The church is running a for profit parking lot.

It has nothing to do with charity.

Nor are they a neighbor, this is just a business venture.

See the bottom of page 2 on the pdf posted in the main story.

Do/Will you charge for parking? Yes

up
14

I have mixed feelings about this one.

I'd prefer if there wasn't surface parking in the middle of the city. But I'm also not happy that this government board is denying a religious organization the use of their land for reasons that make no sense.

Meanwhile, big developers seem to have no trouble getting approval to build major parking garages, which contribute a lot more to pollution than this 30-space lot.

In any case, I'd think if the church is unable to keep renting out this parking, they should have no trouble getting a huge amount of money by selling the land for development.

Incidentally, Google Street View shows parking on this site as far back as it goes, to 2007.

A park, possibly with a community garden, would far better benefit the neighborhood. Chinatown has great public transportation and the church should not be enabling drivers to further disrupt and pollute the neighborhood.

I wonder, though, if developers haven’t been eying this desirable location for building another high rise unaffordable luxury condo building for the benefit of foreign investment. Could they be behind this?

up
15

Take a look at the site. The development on Parcel R-1 - a library branch topped by 10 floors of 100% affordable housing - is about to be built on 2/3 of this surface lot on the side facing the existing Kneeland building. I don't believe anything can go as high or higher than that on the remaining 1/3 sliver, and the only thing that could - a few small 4-story rowhouses - probably wouldn't be worth a deceitful land grab.

I sure hope they are paying property taxes on a lot they admit they are running a business on.

They are. At least for this one lot.

https://www.cityofboston.gov/assessing/search/?pid=0305245000

Assessed at a whopping 150k, what a deal they are getting.