Month: May 2021

Where Things Stand

It seems like a good time to share where things stand. Still plenty of balls in the air, and hopeful the court will issue an injunction. Learn more here:

You may be wondering where things stand. Particularly since this week, Tyler Smith’s “erector set” is going up in town. The appeals are slowly working through the courts. Plus we still await town action on several shortcomings members have identified for them.

Our focus remains on ensuring a compliant building. Thankfully, the courts, like the state, will look objectively at facts, which should work in our favor. Let’s recap what is still in play.

Superior Court Activity

Where things stand at the Superior Court. The Superior Court is currently reviewing two cases and two related requests for temporary injunctions. Our legal team submitted a brief on Tuesday summarizing another good reason why we are likely to prevail. This may be enough to secure a temporary injunction barring further work pending resolution of the underlying cases. One case is the appeal of the Planning Board site plan approval. At issue here are myriad misses in application of the Land Use Ordinance. The most notable miss is failure to consider alternative designs to comply with scenic view provisions. You can learn more here. The second case is seeking application of the 2020 citizens’ initiatives. The argument here is whether a state statute limiting retroactivity to 45 days should apply during a pandemic. The fact is the building permit was issued on March 10, 2021, long after your vote approving the ordinance changes. Since the building permit is the final approval, the 45 day limit is moot. You can learn more here.

Activity with Town of Rockport

Where things stand with the Town of Rockport. The Friends also have ongoing efforts at the town office around: the building permit issuance, parking implications of two missing site plan reviews, and the Planning Board’s misreading of the 2012 parking allocation for Union Hall. You can learn more about the permit appeal here and the unaddressed parking issues here. Regrettably, with respect to the parking issues, the town has been singularly non-responsive. In the absence of a town manager, for the moment, we suggest you send your thoughts on these matters directly to Debra Hall, Select Board Chair. It is unconscionable that the town, when presented evidence of process failures, should do nothing.

Rockport Parking: An Independent Assessment

Independent Rockport parking study shows 182 space deficit without the hotel. That rises to 256 if the hotel is built.

Rockport parking remains at the heart of the hotel controversy. While there was much discussion of parking in the various venues leading up to the Planning Board approval of the hotel at 20 Central Street, there was never a full, open, and accurate review of the facts. One fact is that the Land Use Ordinance (LUO) requires developers to provide off-street parking. Another is that the developer is trying to claim that 21 parking spaces are available behind the Central Street buildings for the hotel. As we have already demonstrated, all the spaces, and more, have been previously allocated to the Shepherd Block and Union Hall.  Since neither the developer, nor the town, took any initiative to have an independent assessment of the parking situation, we did.

This Rockport parking study was conducted by SLR Consulting, a global engineering firm with over 1,600 employees. Their findings are what you likely expect. They found public parking within a reasonable walking distance of the hotel site to be 138 spaces. Their analysis, averaging the LUO requirements with Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) parking demand, shows a 256 space deficit in the hotel area. Even without the hotel, a 182 space deficit already existed. It is important to understand that this is the LUO and ITE standard for required parking. Further analysis by SLR indicates that peak demand average is 271 spaces, or a 133 space deficit.

The developer’s properties, from 18 Central (Shepherd Block) to 24 Central (Union Hall), including the new hotel demand, represent 59 of these deficit spaces. Those properties peak demand averages 108 spaces vs. a developer provided capacity of 49 spaces on Sandy’s Way. Keep in mind what the report notes: The Town of Rockport Land Use Ordinance Section 803 places the burden for providing off-street parking on developers. “The purpose of this Section is to provide for adequate off-street parking spaces to meet the needs of the use or structure.” Do you want to see the report? Send an email to info@friendsofrockport.org with the subject line Independent Parking Study.

You know from our prior post (Rockport Parking: A Brief History) that outlined how these properties owned by the hotel developer have gotten misaligned with the LUO. To recap, they changed the street level use of 22 Central Street in 2017. Failure by the town to perform a site plan review resulted in an understatement of 11 spaces. Then, during the hotel review, the Planning Board reallocated 21 spaces by misinterpreting the 2012 approval of Union Hall renovations. Finally, last fall the town failed to perform a site plan review for the expansion of the Shepherd Block restaurant space resulting in an understatement of at least 30 spaces. The LUO requires 62 spaces, and the town is not enforcing your ordinance. This is definitely reason for you to contact Orion Thomas, the new Town of Rockport planner. Tell him the town must rectify these errors which have been raised by the Friends of Rockport and individuals over the course of the past six months.

What do you think is the town’s reaction to the Rockport parking study? Mr. Thomas wrote of it “the Town cannot nor will use it because the Town did not seek it out. The appropriate channels were not utilized.” You may recall multiple citizens, on several occasions during Planning Board meetings addressing the hotel directly requesting a parking and traffic study be done prior any approval. It is unclear to us what “appropriate channels” may be beyond asking the Planning Board in the context of such a major change downtown. Keep in mind, the town planner sits in on these meetings (all of which occurred prior to Mr. Thomas taking the post).

Are you unhappy about the prospect of a worsening Rockport parking situation? About the town simply ignoring these errors? About the town transferring the burden to taxpayers rather than the developer who is causing the problem? Then this is the time for you to make your feelings known.