Dozens of residents pressed the Framingham City Council on June 17 over what they described as large‑scale, unpermitted clearing and other violations at a 4‑acre parcel on Salem End (Salem End) Road, delivering a petition and asking the council to put the matter on a future meeting agenda.

Neighbors said the parcel has been “massively” cleared since fall 2024, removing nearly all mature trees and vegetation and extending into wetland buffer zones they said are protected by local rules and state law. “This was taken without any required permits, official approvals, or even basic notification to abutting neighbors,” said Dave Abramson during public comment, citing inspections by the city’s building commissioner and conservation staff.

Why it matters: Residents said the property is in an R‑4 single‑family (one‑acre) zone and that any development that departs from one‑acre single‑family expectations would change neighborhood character and traffic patterns. They asked the council to require a transparent public process and stronger enforcement of conservation and zoning rules before any further work proceeds.

Details and reactions: Speakers said the site owner recently transferred the property to Pure Life LLC and named Tony Kwan as the party calling the shots; neighbors reported finding the deed transfer occurred in December (residents’ statements). Multiple speakers said they received violation notices after contacting the city; the conservation administrator and the building inspector inspected the site and issued letters requiring a stop to work and replacement plantings, they said. Residents reported a new metal security fence about 6 feet 8 inches tall placed roughly 18 feet from the waterline and said the fence may block wildlife movement in a regulated zone.

Council response and next steps: Council members said the petition (61+ signatures, residents reported) was handed to the council that evening and asked staff to schedule the property for a future agenda item so officials can report on enforcement actions and any fines or fees issued. Mayor Sissitzky said conservation staff and the building inspector had issued notices and ordered work to stop; he said no formal plans were filed with the city as of the meeting and that conservation and building staff were awaiting submission of final plans.

What residents asked the council to do: callers asked for (1) rigorous enforcement of local and state environmental ordinances and zoning bylaws; (2) restoration and two‑for‑one tree replacement where trees were removed; and (3) a public, transparent permitting process with opportunities for abutters to comment.

Context and limitations: Speakers referenced the Dover Amendment and Mass. General Laws as possible legal pathways that can alter zoning review for certain institutional or educational uses, noting concern that exemptions could be claimed; the mayor said the city would require conservation and planning approvals before any further activity. The council did not take a formal vote that night on penalties or on a specific enforcement action; staff were asked to bring an update at a future council meeting.

Ending: Residents asked for timely public follow‑up rather than having to pursue information by Freedom of Information Act requests; councilors said they would ask staff to report back and to share the petition with members and relevant department heads.