Peterborough has upheld its order that all 25 tenants of the Walden Eco Village must evacuate by Wednesday.
The ruling came despite appeals from tenants, community members, and an ultimately failed attempt at a temporary fix by the landlord, Akhil Garland, who represents the owning entity the Garland Family Realty Trust.
The Walden Eco Village was founded about 12 years ago, residents say, and is comprised of a series of cottages and casitas, or 140 square foot tiny houses, around a village green. Some residents live in cottages equipped with bathrooms and kitchens, and others in smaller rentals use a community building for kitchen, bathroom, shower, and laundry facilities. Tenants pay between $445 and $1,400 a month depending on a rental’s size and amenities.
The town served a cease-and-desist order to Garland on Friday evening after Code Enforcement Officer Tim Herlihy and fire personnel inspected the inside of most residences on Thursday, finding multiple fire code violations on top of myriad permitting and zoning issues on the site. Tenants learned Friday that they had just five days to vacate.
“I packed all my stuff on Sunday and left,” casita tenant Sarah Trento said, and that she, like most other residents, had barely slept since the news broke. “We’re now all looking for legal housing,” she said.
“It feels like there’s not even time to have a conversation,” tenant Quinn Kelley said, describing himself as “still shell-shocked” on Tuesday. “I can’t even get through a sentence,” he said.
“Why was there no town entity made available to answer questions on Friday evening? Why were town resources not deployed to help us immediately?” resident Griffin Kelley, Quinn’s brother, asked the Select Board on Tuesday evening via Facebook, but was not addressed. Deputy Town Administrator Nicole MacStay said the town had to successfully serve the notice of violation to Garland before proceeding, when asked again on Wednesday.
Kelley wrote that Tuesday afternoon was the first time he as a resident was directly contacted by town officials, when MacStay, Fire Chief Ed Walker, and Code Enforcement Officer Herlihy appeared at the Eco Village to speak to residents.
Fire Chief Ed Walker shared photos of specific fire hazards the town discovered at a Select Board meeting Tuesday night. Their major concerns were related to the liquid propane used for cookstoves in cabins and heating systems in casitas, Walker said. “There were issues with the way that piping was run, the way that piping was suspended, the way it entered the houses, and even questions around make up air heaters for the smaller casitas,” he said. The casitas on site had never received permits and therefore had never been inspected, he said, and even the seven permitted cabins had never been approved for the electricity and gas that was discovered on Thursday. During the inspection, town officials discovered that most structures received electricity through a series of extension cords running on the ground under the snow, Walker said. Larger cabins were equipped with a 10 amp breaker, he said, whereas the typical modern home has 200 amps of service. It was hard to tell how much amperage the casitas were receiving since the electricity was coming through such a convoluted path, he said. “It really was not safe and didn’t meet a lot of the standards within the housing code,” he said, and reiterated that a five day evacuation window was the maximum that town officials felt comfortable granting given the danger.
“I do not want any of my community members or friends dying in a fire.” Select Board Chair Tyler Ward said, asking any residents with a spare room and bathroom to consider helping the displaced residents.
Town officials met with Garland on Monday to determine if there were any temporary fixes that could make some of the buildings safe for habitation, Walker said, but an electrician Garland hired quickly determined that the property’s boiler house, which most cabins route their electricity from, does not have enough capacity to properly provide even base levels of electricity to each residence. “My understanding… is there’s a transformer pad, and power goes from there to the boiler house,” Walker said on Wednesday, and that Garland would need to upgrade the connection from the transformer to the property in order to provide a minimum amount of power, although Walker was unsure of what the proper process or timeline for such an endeavor would be.
“The boiler house will be allowed to stay on,” Walker said Tuesday night, in response to several tenants’ concerns since the cottages concrete floors could crack and compromise their structural integrity if the communal boiler that heats them were to be shut down.
Last Thursday’s inspection was prompted by an application Garland submitted to subdivide the property and construct additional residences, which was scheduled to be heard on Dec. 14 before Garland asked to reschedule it until Jan. 11, 2021.
“We knew that the cabins were there,” MacStay said, referring to the seven originally permitted structures. “We did not learn about the unpermitted structures until Mr. Garland submitted the plans [to subdivide] early in November. Until then we did not know they were being inhabited,” she said.
Many tenants and community members have questioned why town personnel didn’t inspect the property sooner, or how they couldn’t have known the full extent of the operations on the property.
The Ledger-Transcript assembled a timeline of dates important to the town’s involvement with the Eco Village.
When asked about the references to code issues and electricity in a letter they received from an Eco Village resident dated July 1, expressing concerns about the impending subdivision, MacStay said town officials assumed the resident had only been referring to the seven permitted cabins. “Did it give us some pause and wonder what was going out there? Sure,” MacStay said, but they still assumed the property was more or less in line with its permitted use, perhaps with some solar energy installed along the way. “Going through the subdivision process would have brought a lot into compliance,” she said, referring to what the town understood to be the extent of compliance issues. “We had no idea what was actually out there, and the number of life safety issues,” she said. Walker said he hadn’t known about the resident’s July letter until this Tuesday.
“We go based on what people come and tell us,” MacStay said when asked about why the town didn’t investigate earlier despite the rentals being publicly advertised through Craigslist and a video promoting the Eco Village. If a tenant told the health officer or code enforcement officer that they had faulty wiring in their kitchen and the landlord wasn’t fixing it, that would trigger an inspection, she said. “Until people tell us, we don’t know. Nobody checks to see if there are illegal rentals,” she said. “We can’t do that, we don’t have the staff,” she said.
MacStay said she did not believe Garland had blocked the town from inspecting the property. “We can’t just drop in and do spot inspections,” she said. Property owners must agree to an inspection and additionally obtain tenant permission before entering their space, she said, and Garland hadn’t obtained that permission on Dec. 1 but had by Dec. 10.
Planning Board Chair Ivy Vann said that although she read the Eco Village resident’s concerns in the July 1 letter, the Planning Board was not required to take any action at that time. She described the length of time between the subdivision’s preliminary hearing in July and its hearing scheduled for Dec. 14 as “very typical,” and said it’s the applicant’s responsibility to request an appointment with the Planning Board, which Garland did in November.
Displaced Eco Villagers say they’re bearing the most extreme costs of the situation despite the town opting to evict them, and Garland violating town and state codes. “I agree with them,” MacStay said. “It’s an awful situation they’ve been put into. This is incredibly frustrating for all of us. As staff, we feel like they are absolutely the victims in this… and it’s horrible that the real fallout from this is landing on their shoulders.”
Although it’s Garland’s responsibility to provide alternative accommodations for residents, MacStay said the town was sourcing homeless outreach representatives to assist residents in need, “expecting that he may not be able to find housing for everyone on such short notice.” MacStay said she was unable to share whether residents had found housing placements due to confidentiality issues as of Wednesday. “I don’t know who is going to pay the bill, short term or long term,” she said of the rehousing efforts, “but it’s gonna get paid,” she said.
Garland has only paid taxes on the seven originally permitted structures, MacStay said, despite collecting rent from many unpermitted structures over the years. She said she didn’t know whether the town would be pursuing unpaid taxes from him as of Wednesday. “I don’t know what we can or can’t do there,” she said, and that her immediate focus has been on lining up emergency assistance for residents.
2005-2007: The town approved the site plans for the original seven cottages on site during their construction, according to town officials.
2010: Town granted a variance after the property was subdivided from that of the Well School, allowing the cabins to exist as the primary use so long as the cabins remained an accessory to the school and any new development received Zoning Board approval.
Jan 3. 2014: The property received its most recent assessment. There was no mention of the unpermitted buildings at the time, MacStay said. Properties in town are assessed once every five years unless a landowner submits a permit to alter something on site or contests an assessment, she said, and the property “might have been a little overdue” for an evaluation since the town put off their reevaluation this past year, she said.
July 1, 2020: A letter from Walden Eco Village resident Corinne Chronopoulos to Planning Board Chair Ivy Vann and Town Planner Danica Melone outlines resident concerns about Garland’s upcoming subdivision proposal, and refers to buildings out of code and that cottages were wired with electricity.
July 13, 2020: The Planning Board staged a preliminary hearing for Garland’s proposal to subdivide the property and build more residences, during which Garland referenced the tiny houses on the site as well as various deviations from what was permitted on the site.
Nov. 6, 2020: Garland submits a subdivision application to the Office of Community Development, which includes unpermitted structures on the site. The application is scheduled for the Dec. 14 Planning Board meeting.
Nov. 20, 2020: Town officials walk the property in advance of the application’s hearing, noting the unpermitted structures and electric and gas connections, prompting a formal site review with access inside the buildings.
Dec. 1, 2020: Town personnel attempt a site review and meet on site with Garland but do not receive permission to enter the buildings.
Dec. 10, 2020: Town personnel conduct formal inspection of the property including inside buildings.
Dec. 14, 2020: The Planning Board grants Garland’s request to postpone the subdivision’s hearing with the Planning Board until Jan. 11, 2021.