Similarly, the recent scrap over the Karp & Co.'s request to add 24 boat slips doesn't seem like much. But it could be the start of an uncivil war over the development of the Waterfront. I'm hoping this dispute will prove to Property owners Steve Karp that the current one-way line of communication isn't cutting it.
First, the dispute as told by the Daily News' Stephen Tait:
City Councilor Larry McCavitt last night blasted a plan to reconfigure a riverfront marina and add 24 boat slips to the Merrimack River, calling the application incomplete and the plan an "incremental" development of the land dubbed Waterfront West.
But despite the Ward 1 councilor's objections, the Harbor Commission voted unanimously to approve the proposal, which was presented by Butch Frangipane, marina manager for Stephen Karp, the billionaire developer who is looking to develop Waterfront West, an 8-acre plot of land between the Black Cow Restaurant and the Route 1 bridge.
The plan calls for reconfiguring the Hilton marina, near the Black Cow, and adding another series of floating docks perpendicular to the enclosed deck of the Black Cow.
McCavitt argued that Frangipane's application did not follow the rules set by the Harbor Commission, by not showing the entire property, by not showing where parking spaces for the slips' users would go and by not showing the area affected by Chapter 91, the state law that monitors development near waterways.
A particular sticking point for McCavitt, who is not part of the commission but was there speaking against the proposal, was the parking required to be provided by the marina for the slips. He said there is no indication of where that parking is or if it could be provided...
New docks will jut out into the river 240 feet from the back of the Black Cow. The present docks - which extend 380 feet into the Merrimack River and include 46 slips - are directly to the west of the Black Cow.
Half of the 24 new slips will be for larger boats, in the 40-to-45-foot range. The fueling station along the river at Hilton's will also be removed.
Now, I know squat about boats or docks, but the idea made sense to me when I first read about it a few months back. To be honest I enjoy the marina even though I don't have a boat. I like staring at the boats in the summer. I enjoy watching the boats get pulled off and on the water each Fall and Spring. This area seems like the only genuine part of the working waterfront left.
Still, I found myself mentally cheering for McCavitt as I read Stephen's article. The opposition initially surprised me, but as I read I thought McCavitt made some good points. Frankly, I was glad to read someone was asking questions to ensure the application got a proper vetting. This isn't intended as a knock against the city in general or the harbor commission but these were the first critical comments I can recall reading.
Not everyone agrees. A friend wrote to suggest McCavitt is "stirring up unnecessary trouble." Indeed the article about the meeting led to the writing of at least three letters published in the News and/or the Current. Here, here, and here . Like me, none of the authors opposed the idea, but they complained about the apparent lack of oversight.
As my friend points out, there's plenty of room for 28.8 cars (1.2 per slip) once the boats are in the water. At one time the deep seat boat used up 50 to 75 spaces, by my friend's account, so there's plenty of room for 28.8. Plus, there's the environmental benefit of removing the fuel dock from the river, lessening the risk of a spill. So there's really no downside to the plans.
But that isn't really the point.
To be honest I'm still a little unclear on the whole mess. McCavitt says the applicant must account for the new parking in it plans. Butch Frangipane and Chuck Lagasse say they don't. One letter writer says he found copies of documents supporting two positions.
I see more wisdom in McCavitt's stance. Every element of a project this large--including parking--should be accounted for in the plans. I'm just not sure what the city actually requires, but enough of this speculation.
Here's a fact. While I read the article I found myself appreciating McCavitt's stance at the meeting. I'm also somewhat sympathetic to the letter-writers (although I thought use of the word "sinister" is a bit much.) Afterall, we've had no words, ideas or thoughts put forth from Karp & Co. other than "the plan is coming" and "you're gonna love it."
Well, that stance isn't working. It'd be nice to get a dialogue going so locals at least feel empowered. Otherwise, every single move should undergo as intense scrutiny as the marina plans.
My friend wisely asks, "At what point do all of these fears of the unknown become unnecessary--and counter productive--hysteria?"
I don't know the answer to that. But if this continues we're going to find out if this meeting is a single skirmish or the beginning of a much larger fight.
No comments:
Post a Comment