Monday, November 21, 2011

Party house of the weekend

260 Grantwood Drive, Amherst (at least the couch blends in)

Located in what appears to be the student rental section of the neighborhood--and managed by, naturally, Eagle Crest Property Management--it's sad to think this single family home was once owned by nationally renowned UMass history professor Stephen B. Oats.

Just goes to show what can happen to a nice neighborhood when owner occupied single family homes are sold off to become rentals managed by Eagle Crest Property Management.

Accord to Amherst Police Department logs 1:00 AM early Sunday morning:

Approximately 30-40 cars observed on both sides of the roadway that blocked passage for emergency vehicles. Dozens of people crowded throughout the roadway while consuming alcoholic beverages. Loud music along with loud yelling observed coming from location. Residents contacted and advised of the issue with little assistance. The house was cleared of guests and all residents were placed under arrest for unlawful noise.

Deanna Helene Docoulos, 226 Rowley Bridge Rd, Topsfield, MA, age 21, Open Container
Four leaseholders arrested for unlawful noise:
Thomas Gilson Jr., 37 Davis St, Mansfield, MA, age 23
Julian Thomas Colarusso, 11 Stanley Circle, Quincy, MA, age 21
Shane Michael Viveiros, 33L Rolling Green Dr, Fall River, MA, age 22
James M Lizotte, 200 Fairbanks St, W. Boylston, MA, age 21



Property Ownership Card for 260 Grantwood Dr

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Just goes to show what can happen to a nice neighborhood when owner occupied single family homes are sold off to become rentals managed by Eagle Crest Property Management."

Well said!

Anonymous said...

stories like these make me appreciate the calm behavior of the students in the rental houses in my neighborhoo.

Anonymous said...

Grateful that I live on a street that is merely one students use to get to and from parties, not as the main attraction. But still, I'm wondering how to make the kid who smashed a beer bottle into a million pieces on my lawn this weekend think about the fact that my child likes to play out on that same lawn.

Nate Budington said...

Thanks for highlighting this blight in our otherwise great neighborhood. There are other student rentals in the Grantwood neighborhood that are meticulously maintained, and the student occupants are good neighbors. The houses in the area you have pictured should embarrass Eagle Crest and the town of Amherst. There needs to be a way to hold rental units in residential neighborhoods to a higher standard.

LarryK4 said...

Well, based on all the cars I witnessed strewn about this morning in that neck of the woods, if the town started to enforce the no-more-than-4-unrelated-persons-living-in-a-household, which the State Appeals Court just upheld, it might get slumlords attention.

Ed said...

Larry -- fish or cut bait.

Propose a slumlord ordinance. A: to rent more than 4 units, you must have an Amherst Apartment Rental License. B: If you f*** up, you loose it. C: All rent due to a person without an Amherst ARL is payable to the town and placed in escrow against claims the town has against the landlord. D: He/she/it can only get the money when the license is restored.

This would put an end to all of this in a heartbeat. If you loose your license, all your tenants get to stay there and pay their rent to the town -- in an escrow fund which is recognized under landlord/tenant law for tenants having problems with landlords.

Which means that if the town yanks his license for one incident -- he neither can get any rent for the rest of the lease from his other tenants nor can evict them. It is a civil forfeture, not unlike when you get caught with drugs.

No slumlord would dare risk this, and all of this BS would end.

Anonymous said...

Embarrass Eagle Crest? Thats funny They could give a S@#t about neighbors

LarryK4 said...

No, but they do give a shit about making money. Oldest rule in journalism: "follow the money."

We're hitting the kids in their pocketbooks with the $300 fines; and yet it's been a year and not a single fine on owners or managers of such property.

Time to get serious.

Anonymous said...

I live on Grantwood Drive within a few houses of the above pictured household. In total honesty I've never had a problem with the occupance.This is the first incident Ive heard of. But some very good points have been made by others on this blog about the legalities of the issue.

PS In fairness. that couch is on the neighboring houses property. It does not belong to the students. The picture is a bit decieving.

Anonymous said...

The ultimate objective is clear: we need to turn this thing around so that we can actually get new housing developments built in town that would cater, at least partially, to students. Attractive places to live, not student slums. Yes, once again, it's about the tax base.

The students are right on this one aspect: it IS about them. It's not a war on them. It's an effort to change the dynamics in the relationships in town, so that students are not seen as some kind of plague on the neighborhood. Right now, it's the thing that dare not speak its name in Town Meeting. No one, but no one, wants to live near large numbers of students, and Town Meeting members vote accordingly.

That has to change.

Anonymous said...

We're hitting the kids in their pocketbooks with the $300 fines; and yet it's been a year and not a single fine on owners or managers of such property.

Larry, there never was any intention of fining the landlords. The kids can't fight back, can't afford a lawyer, and have to worry about being kicked out of UMass to boot.

By contrast, the landlord can and will fight the fine in court (will consider it cost of doing business), has the number of a lawyer in his rolodex, and then can use political retaliation against the town/cops/inspectors who tried to fine him.

I will respect this town if and when they actually fine a landlord. Until then, I consider Amherst inherently corrupt and its leaders bought & paid for.

Ed said...

The students are right on this one aspect: it IS about them. It's not a war on them. It's an effort to change the dynamics in the relationships in town, so that students are not seen as some kind of plague on the neighborhood.

This is why you have a Housing Authority. And what you do is ask the Housing Authority to get into/be into the student housing business. And you ask them to be responsible landlords.

The group was usually low income minorities, not students, but housing authorities were created to address this exact situation -- to clean up the slums & ghettos while providing "safe & decent" housing (that the slumlords clearly weren't) to the people living there.

At present, the AHA has no intention of providing housing to students. You need to insist that it does. And then when a certain address was a problem for a decade (as some are now) even though it is not the same students ever) you would be able to hold someone accountable.

I am not a fan of government involvement in anything, but this is the route if you want to go that route...

Anonymous said...

How come the majority of students don't fall into this "nuisance" category? How come neither I, my spouse, nor my daughters ever showed up in Larry's blog? Because we have a basic respect for others and others' rights.

And to infer that all of these students have inferior housing that gives them an excuse to "party" is just ingenuous.

And, by the way, has there been one student expelled for receiving a noise violation or public drunkeness? The University seems to be saying all of the right things with no action to back it up.

LarryK4 said...

Yeah I vote party champion and "professional" DJ, Peter Clark. Make an example of him and some of the lemming-like followers will fall into line.

All UMass officials need to do is view the Meadow Street September 9 party (that turned into a riot) video on YouTube which he seems to be so proud to have helped orchestrate.