SOUTH PORTLAND — After months of wrangling, the South Portland City
Council adopted new zoning rules for the 12-lot Willard Square neighborhood
Monday night, but not without discord and “great disappointment.”
As the meeting progressed, it became clear that a 4-3
rift had formed on the board, which would have killed the zoning update in its
second reading but for a compromise amendment that restored language struck
during the previous council meeting.
“I think it’s sad to have to revert back, with what’s
going on tonight,” said Councilor Alan Livingston, the lone dissenting vote for
the re-amendment.
Although standards for architectural design and allowable
construction materials proposed by the Planning Board have been widely praised,
and thus, little discussed, councilors have repeatedly hooked horns over a
passage banning residential use on the ground floor of any new or redeveloped
building in the square.
According to City Planner Tex Haeuser, the requirement to
house a business on the first floor was a late edition when the Village
Commercial – Willard (VCW) zone was created in 2006. When controversy arose
this spring over an eatery proposed for the corner of Pillsbury and Preble
streets by square resident Glenn Perry, the prevailing wisdom on the council
was that it had been fueled by a lack of design standards in the local zoning
rules. It then adopted a temporary ban on construction in the square and
charged the Planning Board with drafting new standards for both parking and
construction.
“The original proposal used the word ‘pre-fab’ in the
application,” explained Councilor Tom Coward at the Sept. 7 City Council
meeting. “People had vision of what might appear on that lot and, if he hadn’t
done that, I think this [process] might have gone someplace else.”
Coward called the complaints leveled against Perry’s
project by neighborhood residents “a parade of horribles,” a description taken
up by Councilor James Hughes when he noted that, despite an initial hue and cry
from citizens, they effectively “abandoned” the process once Perry announced
the building moratorium had scared off his financial backing, killing his plan.
It was at that point that Coward complained the Planning
Board had overstepped its charge from the council by looking beyond design and
parking standards to eliminating the first-floor use requirement.
“I really resent this process getting away from us,” said
Coward, prior to 4-3 vote to remove the requirement, excised by the Planning
Board from the 2006 zoning rules, then re-added by the council at an Aug. 22
workshop.
Hughes agreed, saying that removal of the business
requirement, despite all other rules imposed on the square, effectively undid
the 2006 change that established a village center, returning the area to a
simple residential neighborhood. Mayor Rosemarie De Angelis sided with Coward
and Hughes, calling a 90-minute debate over whether zoning rules or market
forces should dictate use, a “red herring.”
“I think this is a huge change to the main concept of
this ordinance,” she said. “That was not the assignment [to the Planning
Board].”
On Monday, the triumvirate of De Angelis, Coward and
Hughes held fast, denying the other four councilors of the fifth voted needed
to enact the ordinance update.
The compromise, initiated by Councilor Tom Blake, was to
amend the ordinance to once again add the ban on residential uses of the first
floor.
“Unfortunately, we find ourselves in a quandary this
evening,” said Blake. “I guess some folks would call it small-town politics at
its worst. If we do not put this language back in, this ordinance will not pass
this evening, and all the work that has been completed over the past several
months will be for naught.”
Blake agreed with the minority that the Planning Board
had “overstepped its charge,” although Haeuser said at the Aug. 22 meeting that
Willard Suare residents had requested the change, while Sally Daggett, the city
attorney, noted that public hearings had been held both with and without the
offending passage.
Councilors Maxine Beecher and Patti Smith supported
restoration of the business requirement. During an earlier meeting, Beecher
pointed out that, even with the restriction, developers can get a waiver from
the Planning Board if they could prove a good-faith, albeit unsuccessful
attempt to attract a ground-floor business.
“I will support the amendment just because I think it’s
important that this ordinance move forward,” said Beecher. “It would only take
three votes to literally deep-six the ordinance and all of the work people
across this city have done.”
After the 6-1 vote to restore the ban on first-floor
residential uses, the council voted unanimously to adopt the amended zoning
ordinance. Immediately afterward, Blake secured another unanimous vote to send
the issue to the Planning Board.
"The public as a whole has not had the chance to be
heard on this particular aspect," said Coward. "My purpose in preserving
the existing language is to engage the public as much as possible."
“If we need to give the neighborhood one more opportunity
to tell us how they want their neighborhood shaped, so be it,” said Smith.
No comments:
Post a Comment