Sometimes a news article is designed to elicit a response. So when I saw the NRA article today – the kind of response that came from me is accurately symbolized above in this submission’s title.
They have no money to create a waterfront park but they want to spend 43 million to build buildings?
Then, after building the buildings, they hope to make ‘money’ to pay for the park and the new buildings by leasing out the suites in the structures.
Okay, first of all;
The public wants a park and no buildings and if they could get away with it, no parking lots either. Each survey comes up with about the same response.
The NRA refused to and still refuse to seek grants to pay for cleaning up the toxic waste in the soil so we can have the park.
The NRA now talks about an underground parking lot when Roger Foster of past-hotel fame found out from his consultants that it would be absolutely and outrageously expensive to do such a thing so near the river.
The NRA wants to put a big building parallel to the extension for the Custom House Museum building a tight, lightless corridor to the water.
The NRA is wanting the whole ‘pay method’ to last a long time to finish paying for all this infrastructure which makes the City a permanent landlord.
Okay, according to ‘build-buildings-to-the-boardwalk’ Shanley, all these proposals are being brought forth by yet another ‘expert’ to supplement the ‘Disneyland’ proposals by the previous consultants. The new thrust is to figure out how to ‘pay’ for the park. The solution is that the City becomes a massive urban landlord.
So what is the track record that shows that the City of Newburyport can handle being a good landlord? How’s that renting out of the second floor of the Kelley School working out? Look how good we were in renting out the second floor of the Emma Andrews Library. What about all these city-owned affordable housing units? Didn’t they get taken up by low-income families that can’t pay regular rates in the first place? I honestly don’t know? Show me some stats here because I can see the city botching such a role BIG TIME.
So, instead of getting upset; all I can say is, something long-range is being plotted which is not altogether obvious. Hence, the ‘???’. Are we suppose to get upset? Are we suppose to offer a counter-proposal? Are we suppose to elicit yet another survey that will say about the same thing?
Or, which is hard to do, ‘Are we suppose to take them seriously?”