vacation is over, time to pay attention
Tomorrow night's CC meeting will be worth getting involved with. The big news is the expansion of the zoning by-law for the developer Steve Cucinatti, cell phone #781-696-4428 who's building the Nobscot plaza community. He is asking to increase the size of the over-lay district to include 12 lots along Edmunds and Edgell and 6 lots along Edgell all of which are zoned B4 zoning. He wants mixed used development in an eligible location as-of-right. Note: It pays to open the proposed map and letter from Cucinatti's lawyer to get the full picture of what they are proposing for Nobscot. .
He is backed by Market Basket if you can believe it. Another corporation trying to bully us into excepting his zoning proposal (more profit and less open space and more congestion at Water and Edgell). The developer's proposal is also supported by a few member's of the council, (I'm guessing it's Janet, Mike, Phil). All the background material is on the meeting portal for CC meeting Sept 20.
I encourage anyone in the Nobscot area to contact your councilperson and the at-large and voice your opinion. And do try to watch the CC meeting tomorrow night at 7PM on your local gov access station.
http://framinghamma.iqm2.com/citizens/default.aspx
http://framinghamma.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=13601
Also near the end of the meeting, the council will either adopt or send back, two ordinances. One that deals with panhandling and the other is median safety. The panhandling ordinance which has been reviewed by the ACLUM, past city solicitor Chris Petrini and our new city solicitor Kathy Fallon, all of whom have written that the ordinances will not stand up to a constitutional challenge.
The Median Safety proposed ordinance is another invitation to federal court, in my opinion. As I read the regulations, I may be subject to arrest if I'm holding a candidates sign on a side walk on Concord Street or Rte 30. You can read what our city solicitor has to say below.
posted by Jim Pillsbury @ 4:04 PM
6 Comments
6 Comments:
Haven't heard much from you lately Hope that changes. This is one big shit storm and no way should we vote for changing these classification just because one contractor thinks he should get to do what he wants, not what the city requires. We set a precedence if we say yes allowing other contractors/builders to demand concessions from the city on future projects. As the the two new rules the City Council proposed, I agree with Jim 100%. Why pay for a city solicitor if we are not going to listen to what they tell us? These new proposals will cost the city lots of money to defend when they are challenged, and the ACLU has already said they will challenge them. Let's ask those district councilors who vote for this to agree to pay for any law suits that result as Jim suggests. Are the willing to put their money on the table for this? I doubt it!
Last night's meeting. http://207.172.210.8:5002/CablecastPublicSite/show/2665?channel=1
1:24:00 2:07:00
So the bottom line is, by statute, the CC had to advance the request to change the zoning in Nobscot. I never knew or even heard of such a process. As one resident asked, what happens if another 10 people sign a petition to change zoning in another part of Town?
Our last hope in stopping this will be at the PB and ZBA.
John indicated last night that there is some risk to both panhandling ordinances. I presume Ms Fallon will be prepared to defend these in court, if it comes to that. Even with just naming certain streets where panhandling is prohibited.
Why would you institute an ordinance that has some risk to the City being sued? This just does not make sense.
Are the 10 people who signed the contractors paperwork even real abutters to the property in question anyone know?
Glad someone has been paying attention. Where have you been lately Jim? Miss you on point commentary
Trying to enjoy my golden years.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home