Month: June 2021

Integrity of the Process

The integrity of the process is what concerns us the most. Are the town processes working correctly? You decide.

Integrity of the process is what is truly under scrutiny in the June 30 Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) hearing on the building permit issuance for 20 Central Street LLC. While the hotel is the current example, the larger concern is about the integrity of the approval process. In fact, that has been true throughout the Planning Board hearings, appeal to the ZBA of the site plan approval, and the appeal to Superior Court of the ZBA ruling. This is your opportunity to make a difference and be heard. Send an email to Kerry Leichtman, acting town manager, for inclusion in the ZBA materials. Tell them you care about the integrity of the process and will not stand for the disconnect between the site plan approved by the Planning Board and the building permit plans subsequently approved by the Code Enforcement Officer (CEO). You can learn more particulars in these earlier posts: ZBA summary, changes in use and changes in design.

Rockport, like any small town, relies heavily on citizen volunteers to run much of the machinery of the town’s business. Fifteen committees, from the budget committee to the recreation committee, are listed on the town website. The Select Board, too, is comprised of volunteer citizens. By their very nature, these arms of government have fluid staffing and are heavily reliant upon clear processes to deliver you reliable outcomes consistent with town ordinances and policies. The ZBA hearing on June 30 reaches into another process area: the application of town ordinances by municipal employees. This adds another layer of complexity because this work is done without public hearings or real-time oversight. Consequently, the integrity of the process is paramount when a municipal employee is charged with, in this case, ensuring compliance with both town ordinances and the prior approval from the Planning Board. Once that building permit is issued, the only public recourse is to appeal.

As outlined already, the process broke down this time because the structure covered by the building permit differs in very significant ways from that approved by the Planning Board. Now we test the integrity of the next process step, the ZBA appeal process. Regardless of your feelings about the hotel, you most certainly want the town’s processes to be clear, compliant, and repeatable. That should be your message to the ZBA in advance of this hearing. The Code Enforcement Officer must both ensure compliance with the town’s ordinances and with the Planning Board-approved site plan. It simply did not happen this time. Let your voice be heard as one for clear, consistent, compliant processes. Send that email to Kerry Leichtman and attend the meeting on Wednesday at 5:30PM in the Opera House basement meeting room. We’ll see you there!

Zoning Board of Appeals review of building permit

The Zoning Board of Appeals must answer a simple question: Is the building under construction the same as what the Planning Board approved?

The Zoning Board of Appeals review of the building permit appeal is June 30 at 5:30PM in the Rockport Opera House and via livestream. This review is all about the difference between what the Planning Board approved and what the town Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) approved by issuing a building permit. You have seen many of the elements in the appeal relating to changes in use and changes in design. It is important to recap the biggest ones ahead of the hearing to seek your involvement in the process.

Changes in Use – The most troublesome change from the planning board’s site plan approval to the CEO’s approved building permit relates to the use changes in the public spaces. During the Planning Board hearings, the top floor public space was characterized as a “top level restaurant (+/- 60 seats) [which] will be busiest in the afternoon and evening.” Yet, the plan submitted to the CEO is a 132-seat event space. Similarly, during the hearings the developer said of the street level space “the main function of the lower level restaurant (+/- 24 seats) will be breakfast for the guests.” This space was submitted as 34 seats with a bar (no seating shown there) and piano. Taken together, this is a 98% increase in seating – 84 to 166. Most telling is what the developer said to The Camden Herald on November 13, 2020. The article said “In the summer of 2022 or 2023, a wedding reception may be held on the top floor of a new hotel in downtown Rockport, giving the revelers an unparalleled view of the scenic harbor. Downstairs in the bar and lounge area, a visiting musician may take a turn at the baby grand piano, entertaining other guests.” How does the town CEO unilaterally allow for such a significant change in use from the Planning Board approved site plan? What is the point of the site plan review process if agreed upon parameters are not honored by the town?

Changes in Design – Aside from the uses and related parking requirements, the site plan review looks primarily at the exterior of the proposed building. As you can see here, there were myriad design changes from the planning board approval. The developer will likely argue these are immaterial. The sheer number of changes, though, runs roughshod over already debatable Land Use Ordinance (LUO) compliance. Recall that section 1003.2 of the LUO requires “The architectural design of structures and their materials and colors shall be visually harmonious with the overall appearance of neighboring structures.” The most egregious change is the appearance of a retractable roof over the top floor public space. Despite all the talk about light and noise concerns from the property, the developer decided to dramatically worsen both … so far getting away with it. Here, again, the CEO has unilaterally approved something wildly different from the Planning Board approved site plan. How is that possible? Particularly galling is the fact that unlike the site plan approval process, the building permit review is done without public oversight. All we can do is appeal to our fellow citizens on the ZBA to rein in the CEO.

These big issues demand the ZBA invalidate the building permit and remand the new design to the Planning Board for review. With the hearing coming on June 30, now is your time to be heard on this matter. Please send your thoughts by email to Town Planner Orion Thomas, and request that he pass along to the ZBA for consideration.

Downtown parking…and so it begins

Anyone driving through downtown Rockport in the past few weeks will have no doubt noticed the distinct absence of downtown parking spaces, even during “off peak” hours.  Why is this?  Well, the developers and their entourage have effectively usurped virtually every available parking space within blocks of the hotel.

For example, the developers have dedicated the entire parking lot on Sandy’s Way (behind the nascent hotel) to construction. That is despite all of those spaces being pledged to tenants in the existing buildings…18 Central Oyster Bar and Grill, Bay Chamber Concerts & Music School, Nina June, and so on.  Too bad for you, tenants!  To paraphrase a line from “Seinfeld”….No Parking for YOU!

In addition, since the hotel construction site encroaches on the street between 18 and 22 Central, the sidewalk and the parking that went with it are gone – and the developers regularly block off most of the downtown parking extending up the street for various staging activities.  To make matters worse, the developers and their workmen have taken over all of the parking spaces overlooking the harbor, most of the parking between 18 Central and the Opera House, and a good chunk of the parking on the north side of the street.

The photo shows Central Street in Rockport on a recent Saturday evening (yes, construction continues on Saturdays and Sundays).  This is without anything happening at Bay Chamber, by the way.  Note the cars lined up all the way up to the Opera House.

Did you, a resident or visitor, have an urge to come to downtown Rockport to patronize a restaurant, or the music school?  Well, too bad for you, buddy.  Unless you’re a developer or work for one, don’t plan on parking anywhere downtown. 

It hardly needs saying that this is going on BEFORE the hotel opens.  Which highlights the fallacy perpetrated by the town that there is plenty of parking and the developer need not provide any more.  Well, perhaps there is enough parking for the hotel…if nobody else wants to park in Rockport!  Which is, apparently, how the town wants it.

To be fair, the town has now proposed an expensive new parking lot overlooking the harbor…naturally taxpayers foot the bill.  Largely because the Planning Board misinterpreted the historic record on Union Hall parking and the Code Enforcement Officer failed to require site plan reviews (and parking) for the 18 Central Street and 22 Central Street renovations. That is at least 62 required spaces never addressed by the town.

So, the town is not requiring developers to provide sufficient parking for their enterprises (as required by the LUO). Then allowing them to monopolize all of the public downtown parking for their own purposes. Then suggesting the rest of us pony up to build a lot that will only partially replace the parking the developer has appropriated. And, they want to meter the new lot … so you can pay to use it, too! If it seems a bit off to you that a private developer should take over all the downtown parking, leaving nothing for anybody else, then we encourage you to contact your Select Board and let them know how you feel.