NEWBURYPORT
Open land debate renewed
Group opposes city on any development of waterfront lots
By Taryn Plumb / Globe Correspondent / April 12, 2012
The enduring and contentious debate over what to do with the city’s remaining undeveloped waterfront parcels - build on them or leave them open - has flared up again.
The Newburyport Redevelopment Authority, supported by Mayor Donna Holaday, is in the preliminary stages of analyzing options for retail, dining, and residential development on 4.2 acres of downtown riverfront that now serves as dirt-and-gravel public parking lots.
In response, some residents and other locals involved with regional preservation efforts have reestablished the Committee for an Open Waterfront, which has fought development on that site in the past, most recently a hotel in the late 1980s. The group prefers to have the area kept open to preserve the view, public access, parking, and, potentially, an expanded public park.
“Any additional building on the waterfront is damaging and inadmissible,’’ said Jim Critchlow, a member of the committee who has lived in the city for more than 25 years. “The open space of the waterfront is the jewel in the crown of Newburyport.’’
But not all share that view, and the town Redevelopment Authority, which manages the property, has long eyed it for development. Most recently, the authority signed an agreement with the state agency MassDevelopment to formulate requests for proposals for development possibilities on the site. It is also working with consulting firms, including Providence-based Union Studio, and is sharing $25,000 in consulting costs with the city.
The goal is to have a proposal request ready by midsummer, and host a public input meeting sometime this spring that would include a site walk. The Redevelopment Authority’s next public meeting is April 18.
“It’s important to state that we’re at the preliminary stages of putting this together,’’ said authority chairman James Shanley, a former city councilor. “There is no proposal at the table.’’
Ultimately, “we are years out,’’ he said.
The Redevelopment Authority, which was established by state law in 1960, is currently determining the possibilities for the property, which was active commercial space for hundreds of years until the 1960s, according to Shanley.
Through that process, they will assess local zoning and the state’s Public Waterfront Act, as well as parking requirements and five preserved “ways to the river’’ that cross the parcel.
Shanley confirmed that the group is looking at mixed-use options, including retail, restaurants, and residences, as well as multistoried buildings. It is not exploring options for a hotel, he said.
“We’re trying to improve the waterfront and make it a more vital place, year-round,’’ he said. However, he stressed that “nothing we’re proposing, or even thinking about, is going to preclude anybody from enjoying the waterfront.’’
Holaday agreed, calling herself a “strong proponent’’ of an open waterfront.
Although the city and the redevelopment authority have long “been at odds’’ about the disposition of the site, she said, she sees the current partnership as a means to identify property that can be used for “very controlled and very limited development’’ to ultimately finance the creation of a maritime park, and to also reduce parking.
Those are goals that would be in line with the goals of the citizen committee.
Ideally, the group would like to see the parking lots converted to grassy, tree-lined open space with paved walkways.
“Downtown Newburyport doesn’t need more condos and stores,’’ said member Lon Hachmeister, a Newbury resident and frequent Newburyport visitor.
Much like the proposal, the group is still in its preliminary stages: It plans to circulate a petition, and has been meeting every other Sunday at 6 p.m. at the Grog Restaurant.
Members have so far expressed concerns about the effect on established businesses should more competition be introduced in the way of new stores, a further strain on parking should spots be eliminated, as well as the impact on tourism if the view is blocked by development.
“Whenever you go to a city, one of the things you remember most is the open space,’’ said Critchlow, a retired foreign policy worker for the federal government who traveled all over the world for his job. “I would hate to see us give that up here in Newburyport.’’
But Shanley says that many of the group’s concerns are unfounded.
“What they’re saying is fundamentally a zero-sum game argument: That if something new shows up, then something old must go. That’s really not how economies work,’’ he said.
He pointed to nearby Portsmouth, where new restaurants and stores are introduced “all the time. . . . It adds, it gives people options and choices, which creates more of a destination.’’
And, while Hachmeister said that “everyone we talk to agrees’’ with the group’s stance, Shanley said that hasn’t been his experience.
“It’s not accurate to say that they speak for everybody in Newburyport,’’ he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment