Category Archives: Planning and Development

Planning and Development, Newburyport, MA, urban planning, the design, construction and organization of Newburyport’s urban spaces, architecture and activities.

Newburyport, Design Review Board

I’ve been thinking a lot about what I hear floating around and that is “allegedly” the conflict with many architects in Newburyport and Newburyport’s Planning Director, Nick Cracknell. What I hear floating in the wind, is that when it comes to design review that there are many folks who feel that nothing can get by without Nick Cracknell’s approval and that Nick Cracknell in the area of design review, is a “dictator.”

Again no fact checking here. This is a blog, the editor (me) doesn’t “fact check” and none of this particular design review conflict stuff has been in any of the local periodical as of yet that I know of.

Now Nick Cracknell is using the Newburyport Master Plan as the guideline. And a very quick read through, by no means thorough, the emphasis appears to be keeping the historic quality and integrity of Newburyport, Massachusetts. I can’t find in my cursory reading anywhere where it says that the emphasis is a combination of historic integrity combined with contemporary culture (which might apply to someplace like Stanford Connecticut or my hometown of New York City.) And I am continually amazed at the at the diversity of viewpoints that assembled this document, including such folks as Jonathan Woodman, former mayor Byron Matthews and current mayor John Moak.

I’ve also been thinking a lot about Inn Street, which is in my mind is a marvelous weaving together of the old and the new. The “brick court yard” (I don’t know what else to call it) with it’s contemporary sculpture, to me makes the whole thing visually “pop.” (Sorry folks that’s the artist in me.)

And I’ve always thought of Jonathan Woodman as one of the original historic preservationist, because he was one of the first people to take a chance and restore one of the downtown buildings, which at the time was a very risky venture, very risky indeed. And for this, we all owe him big time.

Now, I grew up in New York City, and I love contemporary architecture, so I am very sympathetic to architects who have a modern/contemporary background and would like to do something more than historic replications, and find that notion artistically stifling.

Jim Roy in the Newburyport Current, keeps alluding to a design review board made up of all architects (I haven’t asked Mr. Roy where he keeps getting this one from, again here we go with the no “fact checking” thing), which I agree would be a deadly idea.

I like Doug Locy’s (Chairman of the Newburyport Planning Board) proposal in the Letter to the Editor in the Newburyport Daily News, February 16, 2006, of “a proposed five-member board that would l consist of a registered architect, a landscape architect, a developer, a member of the Historical Commission and a member of either the Planning Board or ZBA (Zoning Board of Appeals).” (Personally, I’d throw in the Planning Director, but that’s just me.)

And I’m guessing that this board would review every applicable project. (And from what I hear in the wind, there is by no means a consensus on this approach–again, no “fact checking” here.) This would at least assure of some give and take and hopefully a respectful coming together of ideas on how, from a design point of view, Newburyport, Massachusetts could proceed.

And from what I understand, the Newburyport Planning Board and the Newburyport Planning Office have been advocating for a design review board along this line for sometime. And from what I hear floating around in the wind, the conflict is how it would be constructed, who would make up the design review board and how exactly it would be implemented. Civics is never an easy thing.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Political Tasks Forces and Special Committees

I’m afraid I’m on a bit of a “tear” about this business of a Chapter 40B housing project on the 22 acre Woodman property on Low Street behind the Storey Avenue Shopping Plaza.

According to the Newburyport Daily News, on March 6, 2006, Mayor John Moak “plans to form a task force to study the future” of the Woodman property.

I am very suspicious of “task forces” and “special committees.” I think task forces are often used for political purposes by administrations to justify making politically unpopular decisions.

It has always been my opinion that the first Building Needs Committee that was assembled, was in great part assembled to justify closing the Kelly School. I always thought it was a great piece of political maneuvering, except that I’m a big fan of the Kelly School.( And btw, since there now seems to be even more momentum to close the Kelly School, feel free Kelly School parents and fans to use the Newburyport Political Blog to educate people on why keeping the Kelly School open is so important to the fabric of Newburyport, Massachusetts.)

Frankly, I feel the City of Newburyport has come up with an excellent idea of what to do with the Woodman property. Obviously the Open Space Committee and the “Planners” have put an enormous amount of thought and effort into what I am calling this “dilemma.” So forming a task force, in my mind, means that Mayor John Moak most probably has a whole other agenda and could be using a task force to get it implemented.

Now, if Mayor Moak forms a task force to look at what the City of Newburyport would do if plan A falls through, that would make sense to me. But forming a task force to look at the “plus and minuses of the land purchase” smells of political strategizing to me, and politically opening a huge “can of worms.” Again, what part of “you cannot negotiate with a Chapter 40B project” does the mayor not understand?

This does not mean I am not for affordable housing. I’m for affordable housing in a big way. In fact I think 10% of the housing stock for affordable housing is way too low, I’d like to see Newburyport have 25-30% affordable housing, “how about them apples.”

And as far as I’m concerned, Chapter 40B is mostly used by developers to make huge amounts of money, without taking into consideration the overall fabric of Massachusetts’ communities. I’d like to see our affordable housing be incorporated into the fabric of Newburyport, which has been the emphasis for the last 4 years ( and yes, I’m talking about Nick Cracknell’s leadership as Newburyport Planning Director on this particular issue.)

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Waterfront West

In response to Ben Laing’s post, I do not have a Ph.D. in zoning or planning and development, a real amateur here, but as I understand it, the zoning overlay for Waterfront West is to provide the City of Newburyport with some protection for that area.

My understanding is that Waterfront West is the area west of State Street that contains such things as the Fitness Factory and Michael’s Harborside.

The goal is to try and make sure that the land is developed properly and matches the rest of the City of Newburyport, using State Street as the model.

And I think a lot of people in Newburyport share Mr. Laing’s unease about Stephen Karp. (That’s why we need to keep Nick Cracknell as Newburyport’s Planning Director–see earlier post.)

Newburyport, Concerns about Stephen Karp

After reading yesterday’s (March 8th) Newburyport Daily News article about the concerns of local businesses downtown, I became a little concerned as well. In the article there was a list of all the property owned by Mr. Karp. The list is about as long as my arm. I’m not sure what the exact figure is but it would seem he must own 75% of the down town area.

What really worried me was a line in the article talking about Stephen Karp’s plans for his property on the waterfront — “Karp has been silent on specifically what he plans to do.”

Now, I could be wrong but did not the Newburyport City Council overwhelmingly vote to approve a zoning change for the Waterfront West area? Does it seem a little strange to anyone else that we would approve something like that without knowing exactly what is planned to be built on the site? Wouldn’t that sort of information be crucial in determining whether or not a zoning change could be made?

As I said, I could be wrong about this, maybe the Newburyport City Council knows something that I don’t. And maybe there is a legitimate explanation, but from where I’m sitting it would seem that the Newburyport City Council dropped the ball on this and was negligent in their duties, in essence it would seem they “sold us out.”

To approve such a drastic and dramatic zoning change such as that without even seeing a plan for what might be built there seems irresponsible to me, and frankly scares me. In my mind, if a proposal to make such a change came in front of the Newburyport City Council, I would hope the Council would make Mr. Karp, or a representative, come share a detailed plan, so that everyone would know exactly what we were getting ourselves into.

Now it may be out of our hands to stop any development that would be harmful to the city. I share the thoughts of Lee Yeoman’s, quoted in the Daily News, “I’m very concerned where we are going with Mr. Karp. He’s a big player in town. Not knowing is a little uneasy.”

Ben Laing, Newburyport

Newuryport, Massachusetts, Woodman Property and Mayor Moak

One of the things that I’ve been doing since I started the Newburyport Political Blog is mining different publications for information. And in the Newburyport Daily News, Monday March 6, 2006, tucked away on page A3 is a little ditty about Mayor John Moak and the Woodman Property on Storey Avenue.

The Woodman property is the 22 acres that sits across from the Port Plaza Shopping Center. The project that has been proposed by Seaport Village LLC is for 150 units, I believe in three buildings, two containing 38 units, one containing 36 units. ( I have gotten that information from a story written in the Newburyport Daily News on August 19, 2004. Do not take this information “to the bank,” please see disclaimer on all information on the Guidelines page of the Newburyport Political Blog.)

Previously, the City of Newburyport stepped in with an alternative plan that would buy the land and the project would only contain 10 dwellings, to include affordable housing. At the moment this is all up in the air, and the issue is in Land Court (all of that is for some other post.)

The Seaport Village has been filed under a state affordable housing law, Chapter 40B. The law allows developers to bypass all local zoning laws and there is no restriction on how high or how dense the project can be when a quarter of the units are set aside for affordable housing. This has been a nightmare for cities and towns all across the Commonwealth.

In Monday’s Newburyport Daily News, it sounds as if Mayor John Moak thinks that having this huge development might not be a bad idea. (The Mayor is forming a task force to look at the issue.)

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my city to look like Danvers or Revere (please, no offense to Danvers or Revere.) I don’t want sprawl in Newburyport, Massachusetts, I want smart growth. I want us to be an historic seaport city with an historic character. I don’t want Newburyport to be yet another North Shore suburb and Route 95 pit-stop. (Is this the “vision” that Mayor Moak wants?)

The city cannot negotiate with any project that is Chapter 40B (what part of this does Mayor John Moak not understand.)

Does Mayor John Moak have any idea how many communities are fighting against 40B projects like this? (Amesbury and Chelmsford to name two. Chelmsford has a whole website against their project, as do a lot of other communities) All over the state there are citizens groups fighting the harmful effects of 40B projects. And if Mayor Moak doesn’t think that’s not going to happen here, especially when there looks like there is a possible positive solution at hand, the Mayor of Newburyport, Massachusetts is just kidding himself.

I do not know what Mayor John Moak could possibly be thinking here, but it gives me the willies. And out there in web-land, I hope it gives you the willies too.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Background on Cherry Hill and the Access Road

Since I am discovering more and more that many of the readers of the Newburyport Political Blog have lived here for a “short” time, I thought I would give some background on two events, Cherry Hill and the Access Road.

Cherry Hill was a large piece of open space abutting Maudslay State Park. The City of Newburyport had the chance to buy it. But, the Newburyport City Council felt that the City of Newburyport did not have the money and voted against the sale of the property. The property was then made into a development.

For many years different administrations and businesses had wanted to put an “access road” that would have adjoined the Industrial Park on Hale Street with Storey Avenue. This is a huge piece of open space with wild life and wetlands and the citizens of Newburyport, Massachusetts wanted (they voted) to keep it as open space. This large parcel of land was owned in part by NAID (Newburyport Area Industrial Development) and purportedly (you see, this is where I’m being very, very careful, maybe too careful) Norbert Carey. NAID’s president was Curt Gerrish. Hence NAID, Curt Gerrish and Norbert Carey all landing on the “controversial scale.” (I’m beginning to think that I’m landing on the “controversial scale.” In fact depending on who you talk to, on a scale from 1-10, I could be a 20! Move over Norbert Carey.)

It’s my feeling that a number of very good things came out of these controversies. The Community Preservation Act, a small tax that is matched by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The money can be used for open space, historic preservation and affordable housing. The Open Space Committee and the new cluster zoning law (see earlier post,) called open space residential development which was designed to avoid large subdivisions like the Cherry Hill project. And the purchase of 102 acres along Hale Street that is now referred to as the “Common Pasture.”

Now, I’m not a scholar or an historian. I haven’t gone back and researched these two issues (in fact I’ve put a disclaimer in the Guidelines part of the blog,) this is just a very general overview. Please email me or chime in with any corrections or additions that you may have.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Peter Miller and the High Street Email List

I first met Peter Miller in early January 1999. We both went to a meeting about High Street, held in the Newburyport City Council chambers. Peter Miller and Maria Nortz had just moved to town.

At that meeting, as I was making the decision to create Citizens to Save High Street, Peter Miller was taking down everyone’s email address. Now you have to remember, email was really new in 1999 ( yes, hard to fathom) and we all really wondered what the heck Peter Miller was up to.

Peter Miller was ( and still is, sadly, he and Maria Nortz have moved out of town) one smart cookie.

Peter Miller started the High Street email list, and I learned an awful lot from Mr. Miller. Peter Miller and the High Street email list were one of the very big inspirations for the Newburyport Political Blog.

From Peter Miller, I learned about how to make the tone of a “email posting” civil by using the words “could, would, might, may.” I was just amazed at how an email posting changed when those few verbs were applied.

Peter Miller also tried to make everyone look good, whether he agreed with them or not. He would make sure that the grammar was correct and that everything was spelled right. If he had questions about an email someone sent in, he would send it back and ask if they were sure that they would like it posted. If the answer came back “yes” that email was sent on to the High Street email list. And sometimes, after they had time to think about it, they often decided that maybe sending the email out to the High Street email list just wasn’t a good idea.

After the fight to save High Street had settled down, I was amazed at how many people had read the High Street email list. People printed it, passed it around, saved it, even archived it as a part of the history of how High Street was saved.

And the High Street email list also turned out to be an incredibly powerful political tool.

So if the Newburyport Political Blog survives, it will be due in great part to what I learned from Peter Miller. And I sure wish Peter Miller and Maria Nortz would move back to town. I sure could use their wisdom, their expertise and help. And a lot of other people miss them too.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, the Wetland Ordinance

The Wetland Ordinance–this is one of the reasons I would never want to be a Newburyport City Councilor or a Newburyport Mayor. The City Clerk thing I think I could have handled, but something like the Wetlands Ordinance is way beyond me. If I had to make a decision on this one, it would definitely keep me up at night a lot.

Not only as a city do we have very limited financial resources and a host of things that need immediate attention (see earlier post,) but we also have all kinds of federal and state regulations, that are often at odds with the way that we as a city would like to live.

High Street is the example I probably understand the best. Newburyport, Massachusetts got a federal grant to fix High Street. Yippee! What could possibly be wrong with that one, right? Well, the federal grant came along with a host of state and federal regulations that required High Street to be straightened and widened and all the trees removed. In short making High Street look like a strip mall.

We as a city said, I don’t think that one is going to work, thank you very much. But that took a whole lot of effort on a whole lot of people’s part.

So here we have the Wetland Ordinance, which as far as I can figure out is basically the same premise–federal and state regulations which are at odds with how people would like to live.

One of the conclusions I’ve come to in watching how our city works over the years, is that most of the time there are no easy answers. It is rarely black and white–one of my favorite expressions is “go for the gray.”

Once again, thank goodness for experts and the dedicated people in Newburyport, Massachusetts, no matter what side of the issue they are on. A very sincere “good luck” to the Mayor, the Newburyport City Council and the Newburyport Conservation Commission and everyone else who’s involved. Because as far as I’m concerned, this is one of those issues that is going to require the “Wisdom of Solomon.”

(According to the Newburyport Daily News on February 22, 2006, there will be a public workshop on the Wetlands Ordinance, today, March 1 at 7PM at the police station. I don’t have a confirmation on the date or time.)

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, Lisa Mead, Stephen Karp and Jacalyn Bennett

In the Newburyport Daily News on February 22, 2006 there is yet another Letter to the Editor extolling Nick Cracknell’s, Newburyport’s Planning Director, virtues. The Letter to the Editor is written by Mary Wilkins Haslinger. Ms Haslinger applauds Nick Cracknell’s many virtues while pointing out that we as the City of Newburyport need him because has won the confidence and respect of Stephen Karp–a very good point (hope it’s true.)

I would also add that we need Mr. Crackell because attorney Lisa Mead is representing a number of clients, including Jacalyn Bennett. (Ms Mead is also the lawyer for the directors of the Wheelwright House, and yes I gather she and Mr. Cracknell have been negotiating for the fate of that High Street property.)

Jacalyn Bennett is the owner of Bennett and Company and according to the Newburyport Daily News on February 17, 2006, is opposing Mr. Karp’s first project, a proposed restaurant on the former Mackenzie’s Warf, Fin51. (This is not the first project Ms. Bennett has opposed, but that would be the subject of another post, or in fact a number of posts. We are talking “controversial scale” here. However, I’m not quite sure where Ms Bennett would land on the “controversial scale,” whereas of course Norbert Carey was a slam-dunk.)

For those of you out there in Web-land or who are new to our city, Lisa Mead has been the mayor of Newburyport three times (no mean feat.) Ms Mead has also worked for Senator John Kerry. Lisa Mead knows who all the “players” are. Ms. Mead is a tough negotiator and as they say in New York (see earlier posts,) Lisa Mead is “one tough cookie.”

I personally don’t want a wallflower fighting for the City’s interest in this situation. Can you imagine negotiating between Stephen Karp and Lisa Mead? We as a City need a Planning Director who is also “one tough cookie.” And yes, and I think Nick Cracknell fits that bill quite nicely, thank you very much.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, the Infill Ordinance

No matter who ends up running in the special election for the Ward 1 Council seat, it raises the question of what I call the “Infill Ordinance,” although that is not its specific title.

I went down to the Newbuyrport Planning Office to get a copy of the Infill Ordinance, which is really a revision of a zoning law, and Nick Cracknell, Newburyport’s Planning Director, happened to be there and gave me a crash course in Newburyport zoning. What I came away with was that zoning in Newburyport, Massachusetts is very complicated and I’m sure glad that we have experts. I think I quipped to the person who was scheduled to meet Mr. Cracknell that I was “getting a Ph.D.”

(And btw, I was so busy trying to learn about the complex zoning laws around this one particular issue that I didn’t get a chance to ask a lot of the questions I wanted to ask, like “what the heck is going on?” My golden opportunity and rats, I missed it.)

I have not gone back and looked at all the periodicals to research why this particular amendment to the zoning law was voted down, but what I remember (and if I’m wrong, please email me or call me or send in a post and please let me know) is that the objection was that it infringed on people’s property rights and that it discriminated against a very small portion of the population–those who owned two family homes.

While I was getting my crash course in Newburyport zoning, I could actually see how one could come to those conclusions.

BUT, I think the purpose of the this particular zoning amendment was not to make it difficult for your average homeowner who wants to expand their kitchen, master bedroom or whatever. It was to address developers who are buying two family homes in Newburyport’s Historic District (btw this is very different from a Local Historic District) and building in a manner that is not in keeping with the community.

As I understand it, the Newburyport Zoning Board of Appeals and the Newburyport Planning Board are very sympathetic to homeowners who need to expand in a reasonable way and they don’t want to be swamped with a huge amount of applications.

And what the City of Newburyport does want, is to be able to have a chance to have a dialogue with a developer who wants to radically change the look of a property, to make sure that there could be the most constructive solution possible.

An example would be the project in my own neighborhood (see earlier post.) The proposal that the developer came up with did not conform to the zoning laws. This gave both the City of Newburyport and the neighborhood a chance to have a dialogue with the developer. The developer made money and the neighborhood was happy. My understanding is that this particular zoning amendment would give the citizens of Newburyport the same opportunity when a developer comes into their neighborhood.

For me this would be an example of “smart growth.” I don’t know if the Mayor and the Newburyport City Council would like to revisit this issue, but I still think it is enormously important to how Newburyport’s Historic District will evolve over the years.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, Development Happens

In response to Ben Laing’s posting (nice to have you as a guest blogger, Mr. Laing), my point of view is that development happens. I am a big proponent of “controlled development” or “smart growth.”

A good example of this is the Russell Terrace project. There is an article in yesterday’s Newburyport Daily News on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 on the Russell Terrace subdivision. The project is described as “the largest new housing proposal currently in the works.” (Now I sure hope that people from Russell Terrace and the Open Space Committee are going to help me out here, because I’ll admit, I just don’t begin to know all the details.)

The developer is Norbert Carey. For you out there who don’t live in Newburyport or have just recently moved here, on the controversy scale of 1-10 Norbert Carey would probably rate a 15, possibly a 25. We are talking major history here. The background on Norbert Carey would warrant a number of posts.

(What I am beginning to find is that many of the readers of the Newburyport Political Blog have moved here fairly recently and don’t know about the controversy surrounding Cherry Hill or the Access Road. Maybe there can be a few posts explaining those stories.)

Fortunately, fortunately because of the Newburyport Planning Board and the Newburyport Planning Director, yes, you guessed it, Nick Cracknell, and lots of other concerned citizens, we have a zoning ordinance that prevents the Russell Terrace project from becoming another Cherry Hill. The Newburyport Daily News writes that “The new cluster zoning law, called open space residential development, was designed to avoid large subdivisions such as the Cherry Hill project.

The new homes will be built on a cul-de-sac on about 8 acres of the 43-acre property. The remaining 35 acres, which include wetlands and abut other underdeveloped farmland, will be preserved as conservation land and protected by a land trust, under the special permit requirements.”

This is what I call “smart growth.” Thank goodness for the farsighted Newburyport Planning Board and Nicholas Cracknell, Newburyport’s Planning Director and all the other people on various city boards and committees and other involved citizens who contributed to the creation of this new zoning law.

But, obviously there are still problems–traffic, adjacent wetlands and animal habitat. I do not know the details, but there are plenty of people out there who do. So please, feel free to become a guest blogger on the Newburyport Political Blog.

It seems to me that, as I said in another post, Newburyport has become a very desirable place to live and people will move here and build, or live in places that have been built for them. As I see it, the trick is to find the right balance so that Newburyport continues to remain a place that we as residents can be proud to live in. This is a very complicated task. And as I’ve said over and over again, I think we are incredibly lucky to have people like Doug Locy and the Newburyport Planning Board and Newburyport’s Planning Director Nicholas Cracknell whose job it is to help us find solutions to those very complicated issues.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Growth and Development in Newburyport, Massachusetts

On February 15th, Mr. Martino stated that he thinks the best strategy for Newburyport is to grow rapidly. I respectfully disagree. As Mr. Martino pointed out in a previous post, he has only lived here for 2 years, so he may not realize that in the last 10-12 years Newburyport has grown substantially, and development has been pushed to the max. Calling for rapid growth now doesn’t make sense to me because there is no room left to grow in the city. There is no more land like Cherry Hill or Turkey Hill to build more development on and the only other option is in-fill which the majority of Newburyporter’s do not support. It seems to me that the only people that support in-fill are the people that will profit from it.

What gets overlooked when talking about growth and development is the size of the city itself. We are a tiny city (I believe the smallest in the state, area-wise), and we have a limited amount of space. We are also a very old city, over 350 years old. To continue down a path of development is destructive to the reasons why we love this city. We love it for its beauty and character and we love it because it is unique. Every new development, be it new homes, condo’s, in-fill, or business, is a permanent change that can not be undone (at least not practically). This growth and development robs the city of what we have all come to love about it. It also adversely affects the rest of the citizens that already live here. We have been told constantly through the last decade or so, when development was rampant, was that it was going to benefit the city through creating a larger tax base, and thus we would have more money. Well, that hasn’t happened, and saying we need to do more of the same seems to me to be an empty promise.

There are other issues that arise from over developing such a small city, such as traffic and parking. As everyone that lives here knows, you may as well avoid driving to the down town area altogether on any given weekend from May to September. The traffic is often backed up from Market Square to the Gillis Bridge (right where the Waterfront West development is planned), as well as the lights on State St. During the rush hour on weekdays, Storey Ave. can be a nightmare. The lights on Rt. 1 off of Low St. are another problem area. Additional development will only add to the problem, not solve it. As for parking, well, that’s a different issue, but again it gets back to the character and charm of the city. Do we want an ugly parking garage (that won’t actually increase the number of parking spaces we have) that we as citizens have to pay to use, just so we can increase the development of a town that is too small to support it? I don’t, and I don’t think most Newburyporter’s do.

I think, and I don’t mean to speak for everyone, but my sense is, Newburyporter’s have had enough development, the city is can’t handle it and neither can it’s citizens. The only people who really support development are those that are going to profit from it, and we as a city are running out of time and space, if we don’t take a stand, we won’t have the beautiful city we enjoy now. We don’t want more promises of lower taxes due to a larger tax base because it will never happen. Does anyone think the city will lower the fees they recently increased in the past year or so because we have more people to handle the tax burden? Absolutely not, if anything an increase in people will mean an increase in fees. We don’t want houses that are too big to be crammed into a lot that is too small to support more than one house. We don’t want more traffic and less parking. We don’t want fewer services and larger expenses. We do want to preserve what we have left, what hasn’t been developed yet and what everyone loves about the city, and that simply won’t happen with continued development.

Ben Laing, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, Storey Avenue as a Possible “Village Center”

Here’s a little urban development fantasy of mine. What if………..

The commercial area of Storey Avenue was able to evolve into Newburyport’s second village center? What would it look like? Why would we want it that way? What would be the upside/downsides?

Here’s how it might look:

I’m talking about the residential condos and apartments behind Duncan Donuts as well as the residential areas along Ferry Street, Low Street, and Storey Ave itself as being the ‘catchments’ area of the new village, supplying the foot and vehicle traffic to support “village life”. I’m also including the retail areas of the two malls along with the services, restaurants, and commercial activities on the backside along Low Street. I’m talking about linking it altogether by some sort of design flow from area to area and encouraging the mix of activity that begins to make it a real village.

Here’s what could be added to make it start the process of evolving into a village: Walking paths, side walk and minor traffic light adjustments and a more defined ‘street’ like pattern inside the retail areas. This is at its simplest level a matter of paint and signage changes. I’d include a name adjustment so we start calling it “Storey Village.”

Some new components would be nice. How about a multi functional civic resource center so that people are not always driving and parking in our historic waterside center for every little thing governmental. One small branch of city government could include a small library, the ability to pay traffic fines, pull a permit, register to vote, or have occasional meetings with city councilors, planning boards, etc.

I’d like to see sidewalk cafes in summer. Another reason to have sidewalks! What else? How about a bookstore, maybe a branch of one of our great independents? Maybe a small walk in medical clinic? Maybe a “not quite an emergency room” staffed by AJ or Pentucket? A branch post office would be nice and it would free up Pleasant Street traffic as people jockey for parking and it would allow the merchants of Pleasant Street to have the foot traffic they need.

We could put a visitors center there and in summer provide jitney rides to the waterfront and ease the crush during our high season.

Why do it? We’re going to develop and grow anyway, this path would provide a “smart growth” solution. It would free up some routine city center traffic and alleviate parking downtown. It would save energy, as a number of residents of the area would choose to walk not drive. It would raise property taxes as more infill of the malls took place and some of the homes and apartments on the edges rose in value.

It’s not an especially architecturally significant section of the city and we could see some 21st century ideas as well as inoculating against too much change in the historic downtown area.

Why not? I see lots of upside. Off course the process of change is hard, key choices and tradeoff need to be made, but in the end “Storey Village” sounds more like another great place in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Ron Martino, Newburyport

Newburyport Political Blog Picked Up by Planetizen.com

The Newburyport Political Blog has been picked up by Planetizen.com thanks to Ron Martino. Thank you Mr. Martino.

This is huge, really, really huge. As Ron Martino wrote me in an email (I don’t think Mr. Martino would mind if I quoted him, even though I haven’t checked it out with him,) “This means the NPB is a national player in the planning world, [albeit a junior one :-).]”

I knew eventually people around the country would start to read the Newburyport Political Blog, but I didn’t think it would be this soon. So, Wow!

We are in the section called “Under the Radar.” The entire website (each posting) is being picked up and re-posted on Planetizen.com. Planetizen is serious stuff folks.

Planetizen is a major Planning and Development website. The Newburyport Political Blog is floating around there (Yiddish and all) with major, I mean really major, national and even international organizations (architects, city planning organizations, major newspapers, major universities–go look.)

So what is being discussed on the Newburyport Political Blog is already being read by national and international players. What we as a community in Newburyport, Massachusetts do matters. The world is watching. This is not just about Newburyport anymore.

There are so many important planning and development issues that will continue to present themselves to our city. For example, two major properties on the “Ridge”, the area along High Street in the South End of Newburyport where the large mansions are built, have been sold (the Wheelwright House being one of them.) Developers can now build in front of those mansions, the zoning laws allow it.

One of the things that the Newburyport Planning Office has been thinking about is a “zoning overlay” just for the area in front of those mansions. This would be to prevent developers from building on the lower part of the “Ridge.” It is hard for me to believe that once most people understand that this is an issue, that they would not support this kind of “overlay district.”

Newburyport, Massachusetts has one of the best and brightest city planners in Nicholas Cracknell. Nick Cracknell understands the unbelievably complicated issues around planning and development in Newburyport, such as the need for an “zoning overlay” for the “Ridge.”

I would hope, if Ron Martino is right that the Newburyport Political Blog is now a national player in the planning world ( although a junior one), that we can continue to advocate for “smart grow.” I would hate, as major players are watching us, to make the mistake of letting Mr. Cracknell go.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, City Council Clerk “Saga” Continues

The “saga” around the position for the Newburyport City Clerk has gotten so complicated, even more complicated and convoluted, that it’s becoming one of those situations that I’m beginning to forget how it all originally started in the first place.

You can read about all the twists and turns in the Newburyport Current, Newburyport Daily News and The Undertoad (The Boston Globe hasn’t picked it up yet.)

(And for all of you out there in Web-land who are searching for a way to get a hold of the Undertoad, and there are lots of you out there, I hope Tom Ryan, the Undertoad’s editor won’t mind if I let you know that the address is, P.O. Box 5, Newburyport, MA 01950 and the email address is undertoad1@netzero.net.)

Mr. Ryan, the editor of the Undertoad reports that Jeremy Gillis, one of the applicants for the City Clerk position, is dropping out and concentrating on the special Ward 1 election. (If you don’t know what that means, to figure that out, you’re going to have to read all the back issues of all the local periodicals.) So I would think that would be a relief for Mr. Gillis. If I were him I wouldn’t want to be sitting in the City Clerk’s chair and facing the Newburyport City Council after all of this.

BUT, now we’ll have two “sagas” to look forward to. The “are we ever going to find a Newburyport City Clerk and how will that go saga.” And the “special election in Ward 1 saga,” because at the moment Jeremy Gillis, who ran unopposed in November, will have at least one challenger. And then after that we’ll have the “how will the Newburyport City Council handle whoever wins the Ward 1 City Council seat saga” (which I think would be Mr. Gillis, but who knows for sure. I promise that the Newburyport Political Blog will let you know the outcome. And I suspect it will be front page news in all the local periodicals mentioned above. And for sure, when the day comes that the Newburyport City Clerk is finally appointed, that moment in history will be front page news too.)

But, the big political story will be if Jeremy Gillis does win the special election in Ward 1. Mr. Gillis has very strong opinions on planning and development. He was, and I imagine still is, very much against the Infill Ordinance created by the Newburyport Planning Board and the Newburyport Planning Office. So if Jeremy Gillis fills the 11th seat on the Newburyport City Council, that will have an affect on what happens in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

(And btw the Newburyport Political Blog has been picked up by Planetizen.com, a major website on Planning and Development. The Web is an amazing thing.)

Such is politics in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Neighborhood Development in Newburyport, Massachusetts

As people living in Newburyport, I think often our first gut reaction when we find out that there is going to be new development in our neighborhood is “no way.”

I’ve seen projects where the neighborhood has worked with the developer and Newburyport Planning Office and come up with a solution (Fruit Street for example.) And neighborhoods that have refused to work with the developer in the first round of negotiations and the results have been messy and unpleasant.

A piece of property sold in my neighborhood and a developer was chosen by the seller. The immediate reaction of the neighbors (including me) was suspicion. We went down to the Planning Office at City Hall and got the plans for the property and we were not happy with what we saw.

I went and talked to the Planning Director, Nick Cracknell, and he explained that as a neighborhood we could work with the developer and come up with something that could be a win-win situation.

I also talked to a friend of mine who I trust to be objective and fair. What this person told me, and I think it was very wise advice, was that at this juncture we as a neighborhood had the opportunity to work with the developer. But if we dug our heels in and refused to compromise, the developer could come back with a proposal that fit within the zoning ordinances, but could be detrimental to the community.

So as a neighborhood we embarked in the process of working with Nick Cracknell, Newburyport’s Planning Director, and the developer to try and come up with a win-win situation that would not only benefit our neighborhood but the community at large.

Did we as a neighborhood get everything we wanted, of course not? Did the developer get everything he wanted, of course not? But I look out my window and see a beautiful new dwelling and know that the Victorian house also on the property was thoughtfully renovated.

Did the new development cause change and impact the dynamics of the neighborhood? Of course it did. Is this a bad thing? No, because this is part of adapting to life.

As I said in an earlier post my feeling is that communities are organic. We as a City are going through huge changes. I think as a community we have a responsibility not only on a City level, but on a neighborhood level as well, to not have a “not in my neighborhood” mentality. We can instead choose to see growth as part of an inevitable process and work towards integrating it well into the City of Newburyport as much as we possibly can. Then we as a community have the challenge to try and constructively incorporate the changes that have taken place. Both of these things take time and are not necessarily easy.

So I think it’s just not the City of Newburyport (the Newburyport Planning Board, the Newburyport Zoning Board of Appeals and the Newburyport Planning Office) and the developers that are solely responsible for “smart growth” in our City, but it is the people on a neighborhood level as well.

Change is really hard, but on a neighborhood level, we as citizens can either embrace and help the process, or dig in our heels and at the end of the process not have a say in the end result.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport Massachusetts, a Possible Design Review Board for the City

In today’s Newburyport Daily News, February 16, 2006, Douglas Locy, the Chairman of the Planning Board, writes in a Letter to the Editor that Newburyport may now get a chance to have a Design Review Board (DRB.) Both the Newburyport Planning Board and Newburyport’s Planning Director, Nick Cracknell, have been actively working towards this goal for a couple of years.

Mayor John Moak met with the Newburyport Planning Board and suggested that a DRB be created to advise them. Now with Mayor Moak’s support, Mr. Locy says that a “zoning amendment to create a DRB could be submitted to the City Council and open to public hearing by this April. This proposed five-member DRB would likely consist of a registered architect, a landscape architect, a developer, a member of the Historical Commission and a member of either the Planning Board or ZBA (Zoning Board of Appeals).”

I think this is a very positive development and it would be a great for the City of Newburyport if a DRB could be implemented.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

Newburyport, David Hall a Great Example of a Thoughtful Developer

In another response to Ron Martino’s post, David Hall, of Hall and Moskow, is a great example of someone in the community who has combined the old with the new.

David has also won the trust of the community.

David Hall has done an incredible amount for historic preservation–the gallery for the Art Association and moving an historic building that was on his property to another site are two examples. He has the well earned trust of people in town who value historic preservation.

He has also been working on the Rail Trail for years and managed to raise the money as well as help build the Skate Park at the Newburyport Nock Middle School.

I think part of why David Hall has been so effective is that he also appreciates and respects all the work that the City boards and commissions do. He has his ego in check. He works well with the Planning Office and enjoys them. And has had, I think, a pretty good relationship with various city councils and administrations, partly because of his easy going personality, and partly because all of the variety of ways that he has enhanced life in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

David Hall has built, what I consider to be a beautiful new building at the Tannery (not to mention the Tannery itself, which is a whole other post) which is contemporary, but fits in with Newburyport’s environment. To my knowledge there hasn’t been any contention about the new building (he also had a terrific opening where he invited the public in for a huge all day party for free–great public relations and marketing.)

The new building exists where two huge and unsightly storage tanks were once located. The new Tannery building consists of both residential and commercial units. It also provides parking and a pedestrian walkway connecting Water Street to the proposed Bike Path and to the Newburyport’s Waterfront. (And also in response to Ben Laing’s post, I think that this is an excellent example too of a development that benefits the citizens in Newburyport, Massachusetts.)

The Federal Street Overlay has been criticized by some architects as “being like Disney Land.” ( People tend to forget what might have gone in there, a huge 40-B housing project and also that the two historic homes on the property have been saved and beautifully renovated) Although I don’t agree with that opinion, I hope that most architects would agree that the new Tannery building is an architectural accomplishment as well as being an excellent example of a “win-win” situation for Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport

A Business Point of View on the Towle Property in Newburyport, Massachusetts

Mr Laing’s observations would be true and solidly reasoned if Newburyport were at a perfect equilibrium point where the size of the City (value of property and thus the tax base) covered the basic overheads and necessities of the city.

In business there is the concept of the “break even point”. That’s defined as the level of income, in our case taxes, which are necessary to cover fixed costs. Once the “break even point” is met, all new income only has to pay for variable costs and in effect a profit is realized.

In the case of Newburyport, it seems to me that our strategy should be to grow rapidly toward a level of a property base that gets us to a “break even point.” Then we can provide services needed and get ourselves out of the destructive spiral of cutting based on tax burdens rather than “choosing” based on prudent management and priority setting.

Ron Martino, Newburyport

Newburyport, Massachusetts, Why the Towle Property is Good for Newburyport

In response to Ben Laing’s post, (and I think many people have the same questions that Mr. Laing does) it is my own opinion that a community is “organic,” it can either grow or die. Newburyport saw a “death” in the 1950’s and 1960’s and a “rebirth” started to take place with Urban Development in the “1970’s.”

Newburyport, Massachusetts has become a very desirable place to live and people have and will continue to move here, buy property and build. As a city we cannot stop people from building on their own private property. However, as a city we can advocate for “smart growth” and ask for something in return to make Newburyport a better place to live. One of the reasons I admire Nick Cracknell so much is that he has taken a very proactive approach in negotiating with developers and creating a “win-win” situation. For me the Towle Complex Redevelopment Overlay District is an excellent example.

The First Republic Corporation of America bought what was the old Towle building and has developed it in recent years. The property had been badly dilapidated and had become an eyesore instead of a piece of property that the people of Newburyport could be proud of. It is also a waterfront property and the developer, who wants to make money, would like to build luxury waterfront condominiums. That is the developer’s right, because the developer owns the property.

What the Newburyport Planning Office and the Newburyport Planning Board did was to create an “overlay district” to make it easier for the developer to do some things in return for some good things for the City of Newburyport. The developer will create a public access to the water, restore an important historic building, keep open space, make improvements to Cashman Park, create affordable housing, preserve the view of the Merrimack River from Tyng Street.

So, yes, Ben Laing is correct, this will put strain on city resources. However, the Towle development would have put strains on the city’s resources regardless. This way, the average citizen of Newburyport can once again be proud of the Towle property, as well as have the privilege of enjoying public access to the Merrimack River, along with the many other items mentioned above.

Mary Eaton, Newburyport