I haven't sat through the proceedings and hearings. I haven't even watched the council meeting yet. But I can't understand the Council's decision to reject his application for serving alcohol, as reported in today's Daily News.
At-large Councilor Tom Jones expressed concern about tables moving onto the public way on Inn Street. At-large Councilor Kathleen O'Connor Ives questioned access to Inn Street for commercial and public safety vehicles.
She said yesterday she was against approving Oregano's application that called for flower pots as a barrier to the tables by the public. The barriers must be strong enough that the wind can't knock them over, she said, and light enough to move easily and quickly in case of an emergency.
She also had reservations about the size of the tables, which were too big and encroached onto the property owned by the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority, O'Connor Ives said.
She said the Oregano application was also more complicated than Port Tavern or Agave, as a new doorway would also have to be constructed in order to allow the restaurant staff a clear view to the outdoor tables.Unless the owner of Oregano's was being completely inflexible in the size of the tables or the size of barriers, I don't see how this makes sense.
Wind will knock them over? Any wind strong enough to knock over a giant potted plant would make outside service impossible.
Emergency Vehicles? First, there are two or three built-in wooden barriers blocking vehicle access to Inn Street. No emergency personnel - short of a cop on a bike or Segway - is getting through there. Also, why on earth wouldn't a fire truck or ambulance park at Central Parking if they needed to access the central part of the pedestrian walkspace.
Table size? The owner of Oregano's seemed floored by the decision. This leads me to question whether any told him the tables were too large or the barriers were too....whatever. Seems like these conditions could have been met to allow for approval.
Doorway? Could the council just add a condition that the doorway be installed. And if it isn't - say within 30 days - the permission is revoked. OR, just threaten not to issue approval again next year. (Add: OR let Oregano's install a closed circuit camera ala NPD.)
Kudos to Councillor Bob Cronin for getting it right.
Ward 3 Councilor Bob Cronin said the councilors heard of no opposition to the proposal by the fire chief or police marshal.
"I walk downtown a lot; that's a wide area," he said. "I know it's a little bit funky, but I think in the long run, it's a positive to the community, cafe-style dining. I think everybody loves it in the summer. As long as fire and police don't have any public safety issue, I would still support it."
Cronin noted that the applications are granted on an annual basis and would need to be renewed each summer. They also can be revoked.
"We can look at it and say it isn't working," he said. "At least we can try. I think it's going to be a huge draw to the city."Look, all I know is what I read in the paper and see walking downtown. Maybe there is more to the story. But the council is demonstrating some shoddy play from the cheap seats.
17 comments:
like someone post on the DN site, how can these restaurants use the sidewalks for their business, its public property...do they rent/lease the space from the city or is it included on their tax bill?
Well, the city is letting them with the idea being the outdoor eating environment adds to the greater good. Nice atmosphere. Better for local business, etc. AND, if the city adopted the local meals tax we'd get some increased tax dollars.
Tom,
You should write something about the increase of the Meal's Tax. This may be a hot button subject. The city should make due with the income it currently has, not tax more. They need to be more creative; not ask for more money every year!!!
yeah, but it blocks the sidewalks, making it a bad environment for those trying to walk on them...
@anon 5:30 - I actually did write about this back in the fall when the idea was proposed. I'm afraid we stand on opposite sides of this issue. I see the meals tax as a nice oppty to tap visitors to the town for a little do-re-me to keep the place looking spiffy.
@anon 6:45 - Eh, I've never really had a problem.
Tom,
So only "visitors" eat at Newburyport eateries? Thus, Newburyporters don't go to local sub shops, ice cream stores, and etc. It is the principle of the matter. When does it STOP!!!!!! When can the city, state, and country LEARN to tightrn it's belt and learn to spend the money they have without raising taxes? When can the federal government STOP spending money they don't have. I am fed up with property going up, meals and sales tax going up.
Sorry for venting. But to the issue, the city should LEARN to spend the money they have. They need to work it out with the unions or whatever. NO MORE NEW TAXES!!!
Okay. We disagree.
And no, visitors aren't the only ones eating downtown obviously. But we residents already are paying into the till. They're not. Yet they reap the benefits from our property taxes.
I think the meals tax and room tax spreads the burden a little bit and diversifies the tax source. But I get your point.
from Ed Cameron's blog:
Anonymous said...
just for clarification, this tax increase would be on top of the sales tax (which was raised last year) we already pay at restaurants? and on top of the paid parking we'll be forced to shell out to visit these restaurants and inns? and this tax increase follows the pay raise given to the mayor, and the hiring of a "energy coordinator", the purchase of police cameras set up a block from the station, the proposal to shut off city street lights, and the hiring of a seperate school administration to handle the expansion of the middle school by one grade?
Did I really just publish an anonymous commenter copying and pasting an anonymous comment from another blog?
Anon, I'm taking it you agree with this?
"Energy Coordinator"???? .. please
Why can't people "multitask"? We do it in the private sector. You mean to tell me that there is now one on the payroll now who can take on this roll for some extra pay rather than hiring another person? That is the problem with city government. They should run it like a business and they would be more productive and save money.
yeah i do agree with it. the poster makes a great point, why raise taxes when we are clearly wasting money? why not fix the problem rather than stick a band aid on it?
sorry for my misspelled words earlier.... that happens when I get angry.
What I said previously about "multitasking" goes on ALL THE TIME in the private sector. City, State, and Federal workers have no concept of this. That is the problem. At at local level, why aren't city officials challenged on how they spend the city's money. Do we really need an "Energy Coordinator"? So you mean to tell me that there is NO ONE is City Hall who can take on this responsibility along with their current job? This is a perfect example of how city's tax dollars is put to waste.
Tom, I think you do not agree with me because you believe that the meal's tax should be increased. However, please pursue this as to how money is spent at City Hall and why it can't function more like a company in the private sector. We need someone from the media to ask Newburyport officials thus tough questions that need to be asked.
i.e. Do we really need an "Energy Coordinator" and the hiring of a separate school administration to handle the expansion of the middle school by one grade???????
Oh, don't sweat the misspellings. I do it all the time.
I agree, to a degree.
My eyebrows popped a bit when the city added the full-time recycling coordinator and gave teachers raises in Jan. I don't know the particulars on the additional administrator, but I probably just missed the reports.
Do I have issues with how our money is spent? At times, yes.
That said, I do think paid parking and meals tax is a healthy diversification or revenue. While residents will need to kick in too in most cases, we'll finally be tapping those visitors who seem to vex so many local residents when they find our fair city. (I've got little problem with tourists, btw. I see dollar signs with feet when they walk by.)
tom, the additional administrators was the creation of the Molin Upper Elementary school or whatever they call it... completely superfluous and a waste of money
"Molin Upper Elementary school administrator"? .... there you go (perfect example)... Why can't someone in the media (Daily News, Blogs, etc.) challenge Newburyport City Officials before these things get approved. The City Council and and Mayor wash each other hands (spend our hard earned money) when they approve things and no one gives a damn. I will bet that if more of this gets exposed, then more people will more upset and thus involved in what is going on in City Hall. We are not dummies. We are all trying to tighten our belts as are companies in the private sector. What is City Hall's solution to the problem (RAISE TAXES). Give me a break!!!! Can some in the media have the guts to challenge local City Hall officials? Without any media exposure, nothing will change at City Hall.
PLEASE HELP!!!!
why does my property tax have a line item named "CPA AMT"? Another Tax? Why do we have to pay this? It makes no sense.
Staying on topic, I agree that Oregano got hosed. It's difficult enough for small businesses to survive in this economy, and I think granting them outdoor table service would have given them a nice boost.
More importantly, it adds to the ambiance downtown, and I do not see it as encroaching on the Inn Street pedestrian traffic. One could make an argument that Shirley's cart encroaches on pedestrian traffic when there is a line for hot dogs. A lame argument, but I think equivelant to the city council's defense of their position.
Post a Comment