The Daily News today covers the rezoning issue for two parcels on Storey Ave.
http://www.newburyportnews.com/local/x811213367/Council-blocks-rezoning
You can see the ordinance here: http://www.cityofnewburyport.com/Planning/Planning%20Board/Council-Order-Storey-Avenue-ReZoning-10-11-2011.pdf
The area via a google map is here
View Larger Map
As the story says, the vote was 6-5 in favor of rezoning these two parcels. Voting against were me aka Ed Cameron, Robert Cronin, Ari Herzog, Steve Hutcheson and Kathleen O'Connor Ives. Because changing zoning requires a 2/3 vote, the measure failed needing 8 votes.
The reasons for my 'no' vote are pretty simple:
- Usually matters like this are vetted extensively in committee with lots of public input before they come to the Council floor. This proposed zoning change was introduced to the Council on October 17 with little explanation as to the rationale other than it was for a CVS and there was a possibility that the City would get open space. The Planning and Development Committee spent approximately 20 minutes covering the topic at a Joint Hearing with the Planning Board....just before the full Council meeting last night.
- Although it's only two small parcels, the implications of rezoning, especially for an incredibly intensive use in an already poorly managed area, need to be carefully examined by the Council and not simply rubber-stamped to keep to a developer's timetable. The At-Large Council candidates got an earful in October at a forum with residents of the Woodman Way area who pointed out the poor management and planning of traffic flow both by the City and MassHighway. If you've tried to take a left into Russell Terrace from 113 or take a left from Guiseppe's onto Low Street, you'll understand the point.
That said, there were good reasons to vote for this, as expressed last night by supporters, including the City gets a large chunk of open space, the City would be encouraging business, and increasing the tax base.
Councillor Herzog today filed a notice of reconsideration. So there will be more to come.
18 comments:
Thank you for voting NO!
Thank you for voting no!
Thank you for voting no!
Smart planning and development are essential in this area, especially at this point in time with the Hines Bridge out. There needs to be much more discussion regarding this or any other development in this area.
Carey Lambert
Why do we need another CVS? They have already taken over one part of town, we don't need them to do the same again. And I agree that the location is a traffic nightmare already. Thanks for voting no, Ed.!
I agree with Ruth. We do not need two CVSs in this smaill city. Thanks for voting no.
But what are the alternatives. These residential properties are profoundly impacted by the commercial activity that surrounds them. The owners probably hate the traffic too. Kim & Ruth, would you buy these homes? Me neither.
OK, let's think about it some more, but in the end we must give Mr. Swofford some relief.
CVS, Dunkin Donuts, drive-thru bank - you get what you zone for. if you don't like the result, don't shop there.
Thank you for voting no. Storey Avenue is a traffic nightmare.Adding another CVS to town does nothing to improve the living conditions of Newburyport residents.
Thanks Ed for the clarification. It was very confusing why there wasn't a lengthy public debate, and why it was voted on so fast, why Councilor Herzog filed the Notice of Reconsideration, and what the proposal is. Mary
Also Ed, is there a plan of their plan by CVS at the Planning Office. It would help a lot to see that.
Glad for the no vote, Ed. Do we need another drug store in that area (there are already 2), and CVS has already pushed a business out, so no need for another. The traffic is bad, especially for morning commuters trying to get onto 95 from town, I think partially attributable to the bridge being out. Perhaps reexamine the zoning once the bridge is back, and let's get some retail in that we need!!!! How about a Trader Joe's!!!!!!!!!
Glad of the no vote, Ed. There is a lot of traffic, especially for morning commuters, partially attributable to the bridge being out. Along with that, do we need yet another drug store? We have two in the Storey Ave area, and CVS has already pushed out a local business owner. I say we revisit after the bridge is finished, and let's get some retail that we really need! How about Trader Joe's?!!!!
Thanks for voting no on this. From the information I have, even with the 22 acres it just doesn't make sense
Ed et al:
Thank you for your NO vote. There's been little time for public impact and the developer didn't even show. This intersection is a traffic nightmere already. The massiveness of the proposed store creates it's own issues.
Has there been any recent traffic studies, land use plan updates, etc.? Tho getting 22 acreas of "open areas" might be tempting, the City can't take care of the public areas we already have.
Thank you for voting "no". I totally agree with comments posted.
I am opposed because Port Plaza area has been a helpful, convenient and uncrowded site for services I require as a nearby resident. I deem the proposed inclusion as potentially overcrowding the area and increasing traffic and movement. Thank you for being cautious towards this proposal, as representative of those who agree with your recent vote.
Please continue to vote no on this proposal. As has been said, this area is already a nightmare to travel through. I avoid it like the plague.
Ed. Thank you for voting against a zoning change on Storey Ave. Please do not change your position. Even with the inducement of 22 acres of open space this is a terrible deal for the people of Newburyport. Drive west any day after 3:30 and you will see. Imagine cars stopping after the light to go left into a new CVS, and the usual cars stopping and going right into Dunkin Donuts. We get very little in return, 22 acres that a developer probably does not want and the city will do nothing with. Voting for this would be crazy as the council would be making a bad situation worse and FOR WHAT? We have a choice here, and don't expect the State DOT to fix the situation, they have already tried to do that.
Post a Comment