Council says no to neighborhood
BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:19 AM EST
Council President Frank Cook addresses the crowd. Attleboro City Council budget meeting.
ATTLEBORO - The city council narrowly approved a rezoning over neighborhood objection Tuesday that will allow a residential section of North Main Street to be used for businesses in a vote two councilors called one of the toughest they ever took.
Councilors Bill Bowles and Brian Kirby said they had difficulty supporting the rezoning because neighbors in the area near Holden Street were overwhelmingly against it. However, the councilors thought it best for the city as a whole.
For Kirby, the vote was extra tough because he lives in the neighborhood. He could could have cast the decisive no vote, but hesitated and then voted for the rezoning.
He said later he was undecided right up to the last minute.
"I started off with the neighbors. That's my neighborhood," he said during the debate a the council meeting at city hall.
He said he liked the idea of preserving an old home at 204 North Main St., which the developer has agreed to do, but was also troubled by the way the preservation would be accomplished through a deed restriction.
On the other hand, he said, the deed restriction is a way of "thinking out of the box" to accomplish a goal.
In addition to neighborhood opposition, the planning board had voted 8-0 to recommend against the rezoning.
Neighbors were displeased by the outcome.
"I'm disappointed," Tom Garvey of Upland Road said after the vote. "The neighbors don't want a business."
Garvey said there is a concern that the rezoning will lead to more business encroachment into the neighborhood.
The vote was actually overwhelmingly in favor of the rezoning, 9-2. However, nine votes was the minimum the measure needed for approval because it was a rezoning with abutters filing legal objections, requiring three-fourths of the council to vote in the affirmative, Council President Frank Cook said.
Cook and zoning committee Chairman Bill Bergevine were the dissenting votes.
Cook, who represents the neighborhood as the Ward 3 councilor, said he sees his job as representing the views of constituents and the constituents were against the rezoning, he said in explaining his vote.
"I don't like it when elected officials ignore the will of the people," he said.
But, most councilors said the plan by Orion Realty to maintain the house at 204 North Main St. and turn it into a business was a good one for the city as whole.
Councilor Peter Blais said the deed restriction will protect the neighborhood for 199 years while maintaining the home will help preserve the beautification of one of the city's "gateway" roads entering Attleboro.
"All it takes is for the 11 of us to show enough backbone and not worry about personal agendas," he said.
Councilor Kim Allard, who is nursing a foot injury, came to the council meeting just long enough to vote on the rezoning.
She said Attleboro is sometimes accused of not being business friendly and the rezoning is one way to promote a local business.
View Comments » No comments posted.
« Hide Comments
ucbruin wrote on Jan 2, 2009 1:14 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:36 AM:
ricknkim wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:33 AM:
medical wrote on Dec 18, 2008 6:05 PM:
I have called Mr Cook 3 times in the last month. Two times I left a message on his voice mail, and the last call I talk to his daughter. As of now he never returned any of the calls. "
ricknkim wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:13 PM:
What I don't agree with is his making a statement that insinuates that the other councilors voted against the will of the people. Just because a vocal goup of residents in his ward felt that way, doesn't mean that all of Attleboro does. "
ashley wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:10 AM:
And you know, I'm pretty sure that he listened to EVERYONE who called him not just people who he had signs for on their lawn! I don't even think he had 200 signs anyway, and I'm sure he also had signs on people's lawns who did not oppose this as well! "
ashley wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:07 AM:
Your math is a little screwy. You say 800 came out to vote, okay, and that 200 were opposed, and 600 were unopposed. How do you know that that 600 were unopposed? Did you go to each door and ask them? They might just not had an opinion, maybe they live on the other side of ward 3, or maybe they just didn't care, or maybe they had no idea this was even going on! To say all 600 were unopposed, seems a little high. Meanwhile, what about the other people who didn't vote? The unregistered voters. I'm sure they had an opinion as well which could be ever for or against. Are you even a registered voter?
Bottom line: you are not going to please everyone. I think Mr. Cook did what he had to do, even though it may not please everyone. He listened to the neighbors of this project, the ones directly affected, but also took into account the ward, which doesn't has as much of a direct effect as the abutters to this property. "
ricknkim wrote on Dec 18, 2008 9:40 AM:
As for Ms. Allard - why should she have stayed home and not attended the vote? She is a councilor, she voted, just as all others did. To say she shouldn't have is ridiculous. "
medical wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:15 PM:
I respect Frank Cook but I feel he did not do his math. He ran for office againt Paul Diamond and about 800 people came out to vote in this ward.
200 People some from as far away as Texas were opposed to this rezonning.
If my math is right, 600 of the voters in Frank Cooks ward did not opposed.
This tells me Frank Cook did not listen to everyone in his ward but just the ones he that had his signs on there lawns. Mr. Cook I live in Ward 3 and next time please listen to everyone in your ward or even better the whole city. "
hope2008 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:54 PM:
Attle1 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:12 PM:
s-plumb wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:06 PM:
It's unproffesional to publically attack the intent of your fellow councilors. That was the whole point.
Call Kim. She deserves more respect than she's received. Even if you disagree, she is typically very open, and you'll get the full story, instead of the depiction from the paper. After all they are out to make a dime. "
s-plumb wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:53 PM:
capecod7 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:51 PM:
s-plumb wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:49 PM:
hope2008 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:42 PM:
Most of us read all of your rants on a daily basis, regarding the ARA, city officials and the IBP. They are some of the most harsh and stinging words that this blogging forum ever records. You must be one of the haters that you refer to. Mr. Cook did not rant. He simply stated that our elected officials should not ignore the will of the people that they represent. Do you have a problem with that? You surly have enough to say on the IBP and ARA. Should we encourage our city officials to ignore your rants? You are arrogant to imply that your issue is more important than the people in Ward 3.. Nobody is more important than anyone else. The people in the 152 rezoning issue have treated very poorly by their representatives. Mr. Kirby lives across the street from one of the developers that had a banner attached to his house to intimidate the neighborhood. Guess Mr. Kirby thought that was ok or maybe he was afraid that Orion would come after his property if they didnt get what they wanted. Shameful - this entire display of disrespect from the city council. "
capecod7 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:26 PM:
splumb wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:15 PM:
I believe Kim has addressed this. It's the 1st post. That you refer to is not accurate, but it sells papers, and brings out haters on the comment board. Why is no one asking the same question of other councilors? Right or wrong Kirby was considered the deciding vote, with no headlines? And this is his neighborhood.
I can truly relate to the concerns of those in the neighborhood, but it's much better than what the rest of the city has been through for a better part of the decade. You should be treated much better with a privately owned company, than the ARA.
Let's hope Mr. Cook contains his public rants. It only heightens negative feelings of those who have already been living with the anxiety that anticipation brings.
Best of Luck! "
margo wrote on Dec 17, 2008 5:51 PM:
capecod7 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 5:35 PM:
s-plumb wrote on Dec 17, 2008 4:47 PM:
Digging up the entire city to build 30 empty industrial buildings, seems a bit more invasive than a light traffic commercial project.
The self-serving performance by Mr. Cook, as if he is the only servant on the council, is nauseating. Do you feel yourself a hero, bashing fellow councilors? "
ricknkim wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:48 PM:
They are selling real estate, not raising hogs or opening a strip club. The neighborhood residents are acting like they live on Walden Pond and they are re-zoning it to allow a KFC with pond views. That realty will be a bright spot rather than a detractor. "
kevin h. wrote on Dec 17, 2008 1:10 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:41 PM:
As for devaluing area homes - the property in it's current condition of disrepair do that. A rennovated structure and kept grounds will NOT devalue area homes.
As for Frank Cook, I do respect his dissenting vote since the neighborhood is in his ward. However, how much of the overall ward is represented by this immediate neighborhood? Were these the sentiments of the entire ward or just this vocal group of residents of the neighborhood?
I still find it difficult to understand the argument against the realty, especially with the restrictions and pledged betterments to the property. "
realist wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:33 PM:
The current plans call for something pretty. It doesn't prevent it from becoming a DD or Rite Aid in 5 years. "
Mr. Scorpio wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:19 AM:
abororesident wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:18 AM:
wilson wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:26 AM:
I just wished he had told me the truth.
Now when he holds up the host @ 11:30 Mass and repeats the words : " Body of Christ "I will have a hard time thinking that the Bishop will allow these words coming from a this man. "
ricknkim wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:16 AM:
Gone will be the blight, gone will be the possibility of a Dunkin Donuts. What in the heck is the problem with that? Sorry folks, but your "neighborhood" borders 152, a very high-traffic road with many many businesses on it already. We're not talking some country road out of Yankee Magazine here . . . I'd take a doctors office, realty, insurance or lawyers office any day of the week with the restrictions in place and worry about more pressing issues. "
Forward Observer wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:06 AM:
wfk wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:04 AM:
Ummm....yeah... "
wilson wrote on Dec 17, 2008 9:55 AM:
This is a story about a man named TOM:
Living in the neighborhood I had only one real problem with project, and that is I was not told the TRUTH from the man named Tom and his wife from Upland Rd. He knocked on my door making me believe that a Dunkin Donut or a fast food restaurant would be there someday. I talked to some council members and learned that not to be true and that could never happen on this property. As a Catholic boy growing up at St> John's the Nun's would always tell us they would wash our mouth with soap if we didn't tell the truth. Someone named Tom must of missed that memo. Its time to mail some soap to a man named Tom.
It's time to talk to the Bishop about Tom.. "
Attlemom wrote on Dec 17, 2008 9:42 AM:
ricknkim wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:53 AM:
Is it better to have a non-intrusive realty office (restricted from future changes) that is well kept and rennovated or a vacant building with grounds looking shabby? If this were to be the first and only business, perhaps I'd be more sympathetic. However, there are numerous businesses already there and your argument is nonsensical. "
Forward Observer wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:20 AM:
malonegirl31 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:12 AM:
harry hindsight wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:35 AM:
Isn't that what was said about the IBP? "
Forward Observer wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:32 AM:
kevin h. wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:26 AM:
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION! "
hope2008 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:17 AM:
kim allard wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:32 AM: