Updates from City Councillor Ed Cameron, City of Newburyport
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
This rezoning ordinance has been reintroduced by
Councillors Connell and Derrivan. The fresh start was because the Council
did not pass the ordinance within the prescribed time limit; the saga started
in the last term and is continuing this term. A change in zoning requires
8 votes of the 11 City Council members.
I’ve said several times that I've gotten more
constituent feedback on this than the meals tax, paid parking, wind turbine,
and dogs combined. And I just was
asked my opinion last night at Market Basket.
Overwhelmingly the initial feedback was opposed to this change in
zoning.
When this ordinance was reintroduced a few weeks
ago, I spoke about why I am against the rezoning based on the current
proposal. I've been open to new
information. There are good reasons to support the change particularly as it
relates to open space. It might
but good for open space and the current property owners and the developer and the
City would get some financial ‘sweeteners’ of approximately $65,000 but I still
feel as I did on November 14th:
the traffic of an intense use on Storey Ave
with an in-out only on Storey will be too dangerous
The proposed usage including a drive-thru pharmacy
for the rezoned lots is too intensive for an already chaotic
intersection. I don’t think a CVS
will bring added traffic to the area. I
don’t think it will be dangerous most times of the day. But at peak periods of the work day, it is
dangerous and it will be made MORE dangerous.
Turn into the Atria at 5:30pm, go down into the property, turn and try
to pull out and try to take a left--this will be what like pulling out of a
CVS...multiplied by many more cars than go in and out of the Atria or Russell
Terrace. The developer's ideas on
traffic mitigation, essentially a suicide lane in the middle of Storey Ave., don’t
really address the issue. As one constituent told me, this proposal turns
purgatory into a full-fledged hell. The developers need to work out another
egress. The most recent news articles seem to indicate they are discussing with the Woodman purchasing land to make that happen. The most natural egress from the potential CVS to Low Street, the lot of 255 Low Street, was sold in the fall of 2011interestingly, especially since I recall the Minco For Sale sign being there for about 4 years.
Anyway, one of the arguments for the rezoning:
If we don’t do it, a separate developer will move
in, make a deal with the Woodmans, and put 150 unit rental units, a 40B project,
on Low Street. My thought: any
developer that expects to build units on a property that is largely wetlands
next to the notorious and noxious Crow Lane landfill is going to have a tough
marketing project ahead. What will they
call it to attract renters? Stinky
Swampy Village might be a more apt name than Seaport Village. I also have a pop question for any traffic
engineers out there: what is going to cause more in and out traffic, a CVS with
drive through pharmacy or 150 units of rental housing?
Another argument for the rezoning:
If we don’t do it, Tropic Star will squeeze a
CVS on the parcels that are currently zoned commercial. My thought: If I vote Yes, a CVS gets
built. If I vote No, a CVS gets built.
Another argument for rezoning:
Making these two parcels commercial will ‘harmonize’
the zoning because the area is already overwhelmingly oriented to business. My thought: This argument ignores the fact
that hundreds of people live in the Woodman Way area, the Russell Terrace Area,
and the large apartment buildings on Storey and Low.
Like Councillor Cronin, I feel that we need to take a longer harder look at the whole area. I'd be open to something like a zoning overlay or at least a real planning effort around traffic flow and uses. We need better planning tools for an area which has many contrasting uses. Surely it would be in Tropic Star and other property owners’ best interest as well.
CVS has sited 354 stores in Massachusetts. Tropic Star has a track history of getting CVS projects approved in places like Amesbury, Salisbury, and Concord, New Hampshire. And from what I've been able to determine, they are able to grind it out. I'm sure they can do better than what has been presented so far.
The Daily News article from the beginning of the saga is here.
http://www.newburyportnews.com/local/x811213367/Council-blocks-rezoning
Property Owners in the Proposed
Newburyport Local Historic District
Got Questions about the Proposed LHD?
Get the answers at two
Public Information Forums at the
City Hall Auditorium
1. Ask the Experts – Monday, 19
March 2012 at 7:00 P.M.
Preservation lawyer Marilyn Fenollosa,
preservation consultant Gretchen Schuler, and Massachusetts Historical
Commission Director of Local Government Programs Chris Skelly will answer your
questions about LHDs in general, preservation law, and additional preservation
options among other topics.
2. Follow-up – Monday, 26 March
2012 at 7:00 P.M.
Informal discussion groups with Study
Committee members.
Send in your questions to lhdsc@cityofnewburyport.com
or
Local Historic District Study Committee
City Hall, 60 Pleasant Street
Newburyport, MA 01950
Information from the City is at http://cityofnewburyport.com/Planning/lhd.html
Here is the Yes petition http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/support-a-local-historic-district-for-newburyport.html
Here is the No petition http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/opposition-to-the-creation-of-a-local-historic-district.html
No comments:
Post a Comment