Public Participation

Transcript (~14 min @ 1:17)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 1:02 Peter D. Mortimer: We have one order on our agenda, but before we proceed to that order I will announce the members of our board who are here this evening. I am Peter Mortimer, I am the chair. The vice chair is Alderman Jacqueline Bird. We are also joined by Alderman Gail Inferna, Alderman John Tramontozzi, Alderman Monica Medeiros, Alderman Robert Boisselle, Alderman Mary Beth McAteer-Margolis, Alderman Jennifer Lemmerman, Alderman Scott Forbes, and President Donald L. Kahn, Jr. Is there a motion to open the floor for public participation, please? So moved. Second. Second. The motion to open the floor for public participation has been made by Alderman Byrd, duly seconded by Alderman Lemmerman. Is there anyone wishing to come forward for public participation, please? Mr. McGuire, please.

▶ 2:11 Speaker 7: Good evening, thank you all for opening up the floor for public participation. appreciate you also taking some time I know this is the second time you guys are reviewing this information and you postpone your initial vote on this matter hopefully you've had the time to digest more of the information and understand some of the other positions than what the city originally proposed a few notes that I have just to kind of summarize some of the comments Thorp been some information that I've been able to share with you including the parking study that was done in 2012 and some other information about development neighboring communities and what we're doing in our community here and how this is in many ways contrary to the other efforts that we're trying to make in the city right now first and foremost well before I start let me just thank the few people that were able to come call me back and actually had some phone calls with you offline I appreciate you taking the time to call back so first and foremost you know the Appropriations Committee is is you know the body that's being you know deciding how to responsibly spend funds in the city and this is an unnecessary expenditure this is is a perceived problem but Thorp actually been a traffic study that verified this is not an actual problem and I suppose that this everyone has anecdotal information about you know trying to get to a specific destination and not being able to park directly in front of it and maybe having to find another place that's slightly less convenient there are peak times that all the parking lots go through you know Thorp the peak times represent a small percentage of the time that they're actually available I just walk through the specific parking lot that we're talking about the Dill's Court parking lot Thorp no fewer than 30 spaces available as I walk through I stopped counting after that you know that's that's typically how the parking lot is there are peak times you know Thorp a an event at Memorial Hall Thorp you know maybe a Saturday night dinner at the restaurants downtown you know the Victorian Fair when when most of the people are coming that's when the complaints are voiced not for the other 95% of the time when when the lots stand mainly empty and vacant and as an eyesore this you know this is not my opinion this is based on the traffic study that was done Thorp a very comprehensive study they actually even showed that the existing layout of the parking lot is not very efficient Thorp two-way traffic and all the travel lanes Thorp probably too many loops of travel lanes they can straighten it out and they added 13 spots in their example like I played with some of the layout and actually got up to 19 additional spots within the existing footprint of that lot so if parking count is an issue this you know this can be remedied easily with new layout specifically in that lot and in the other Lots around town this adding 20 spots or 20 you know between 21 and 23 spots is about a one and a half percent increase in the parking downtown so for a one and a half percent increase in parking just you know to borrow four hundred thousand dollars and costing the taxpayers in excess of six hundred thousand dollars that that rate is parking garage rates for new construction of parking garages you know if you're gonna pay the rate per spot of a parking garage probably a wiser decision would be to actually build a parking garage and actually significantly impact the count if that happens to be an issue the the square footage is behind City Hall and even at deals court would support a structure I'm not advocating for that tonight I'm just saying you're paying for 20 spots upwards of 25 between 25 and 30 thousand dollars per spot for parking garage rates is usually between 15 and 25 per spot so if if the spot count the parking spot count is really issue buying 20 spots here is not going to do it if the 20 spots is really the issue restriping can do it for a lot cheaper than this borrowed money and again the parking study backs us all up so it seems like an odd time to be shooting from the hip on you know going with anecdotal information that deeming this as necessary when you know walking one block to find a parking spot is not really you know the definition of a parking problem it's actually the definition of a success of downtown that that it's busy enough and that we're supporting our businesses which I do as well that you know that you can park and can walk that one block and still get your destination and have a free parking spot another point is that this is contrary to what we actually just did this when i say we i mean the city just did a lot of great improvements on the tremont street zoning they're actually encouraging a smart growth zoning district down there and what's being proposed here by the city would actually not be allowed by a private developer in that zone the idea of taking you know technically a corner lot and not having the setbacks that are putting parking behind the buildings and behind the structures is completely out of line with the smart growth zoning that the city is trying to implement right now and that's actually what I'd work with on my in my day job is sustainability and development and construction and one of the reasons that you know this stuck out to me is such a such a poor decision and idea to actually have this be part of the fabric of Melrose many of the other things the city is doing is great they're spending money in ways that I definitely agree with things like you know revamping the street lighting so that Thorp an expenditure of money that actually saves money that's great it's going to be more efficient it's more environmentally friendly the idea of expanding this lot for you know six hundred thousand dollars for for one and a half percent increase on parking is totally out of whack with what the city's doing in all these other directions and is why it was odd to me the the last thing I just want you to consider is I think a lot of the times people think about what's there and think about you know would the parking be much better than what's there it's a building that's not been utilized for a few years Thorp been a from what I understand the lawyers office has been retired and so the idea that the parking would be better than what has been at that site seems to be the main feeling I'm getting for most of the people I spoke with on the committee here well it's not really being utilized great now so the parking is not really that much a detriment but what's happening with this decision is you're locking in that property for the next 10 20 30 years not at its full potential you're i think if you vote in favor of this you're ignoring the potential for that lot to become the next business that people love about melrose the next coffee tea and me or lakachara or you know i know we have a plethora of architects in the town maybe somebody's looking to open up their own firm and looking for a spot where they can do business downtown and own the building so Thorp a whole Thorp a whole opportunity cost to the city taking this lot on with money that you don't actually have you're borrowing the money to do this where you're you're postponing the development of that lot with private money similar to the other neighborhoods that have been getting private money to be fixed up and revitalized which i think is great right now we're actually in the process Thorp a essex Street revitalization committee trying to combat the problem of the surface parking lots the businesses aren't doing as well on Essex Street as they could I know two business went out of business the idea that the city is now going to take an under $800,000 grant which is great to fix up that corridor what they're really doing is they're trying to combat the lack of investment on Essex Street because of those surface lots what they do to the neighborhood and the zoning on Essex and on Myrtle is all the same as Main Street Thorp no reason why that whole block couldn't be developed just as nicely as Main Street with private money but by the city purchasing this property you're postponing investment in that neighborhood if the you know the neighboring buildings go up for sale if Thorp a parking lot there you know it's not going to be the same vibe it's not gonna it's not gonna spread that positive investment of private money so those are the main three points that I just want to make is that you know you're asking for override the city I should say is asking for an override claiming that we need money Thorp a study that says this is unnecessary and yet it's being considered by the by the city is maybe a good idea it's contrary to all the other good measures the city is putting into place and you know lastly don't think about the lot in its existing condition but think about what this decision is going to do for the next 30 years for that piece of property in the neighborhood on Myrtle Street

▶ 10:28 Peter D. Mortimer: thank you Thank You mr. McGuire anybody else wishing to come forward please mr.

▶ 10:39 Peter D. Mortimer: elegant would you please write your name and address there on that sheet of paper for the

▶ 11:11 Speaker 6: record please sir yep i'm jim halligan a mitre biter frame company 479 main street

▶ 11:25 Speaker 6: the center of downtown for 40 years and i can only tell you that as the downtown has improved over those years parking has become a difficult situation we ex i've seen the expansion of the

▶ 11:49 Speaker 6: friends lot i was part of the um study that mr mcguire talked about the chamber helped in that study we went out and checked at various times how many parking spaces there were but we never did a seven o'clock at night check on a thursday friday night

▶ 12:21 Speaker 6: you'd be hard pressed to find one space and yes during certain times like on a monday morning You'll find plenty of spaces, especially in the middle of summer but a Saturday morning in September when the Y is going full blast and Gaitley's is having your funeral. You will not find a single space. I think taking this lot Taking that building and tearing it down and making a parking lot

▶ 12:58 Speaker 6: extension is looking not just now but into the future that's 23 spaces more that we'll have for downtown Melrose we have a lot of empty spaces at the back

▶ 13:15 Speaker 6: of City Hall but I would not want to go from there to go down to coffee tea and me I would want to pack in the vicinity of coffee tea and me so that was one of the things that the study said yes we had available spaces and now that the

▶ 13:37 Speaker 6: city is ready to move the special permit people away from down the center part of downtown that will help but i see this lot as a future growth thing not just for right now

▶ 14:02 Speaker 6: and that's my opinion of the parking situation thank you very much mr halligan

▶ 14:19 Peter D. Mortimer: appreciate you coming are there other other members of the public wishing to be heard at this

▶ 14:26 Peter D. Mortimer: time seeing none motion to close public participation second we have a motion to close public participation made by alderman forbes duly seconded by alderman inferna all in favor of the motion to close public participation please say aye aye any opposed hearing none public participation is now closed motion to suspend the rules to ask

▶ 14:45 Gail Infurna: mr van kampen and appropriate personnel to come before us would you hold that motion for one