Acting with an approval in hand, Al Lampert gave his contractor permission to commence demolition. Al had already expressed to the Historic District Commission (HDC) that it was commercially impractical to save any of the "historic" walls of the old garage. In fact, in trying to save some of the internal block wall he was asking for approval for a building 35 foot in height, which exceeded the 25 feet allowed. He and his team of architects had been sent back to the drawing board for a redo once again at a cost to him.
It really did seem like an endless gauntlet to obtain a final approval from the HDC and send the project along to the Planning Board. It is difficult not to understand the frustration of this developer trying to do right by the downtown and to make major improvements to a very rundown part of downtown. It is difficult to see this property as being the "gateway" to downtown given it is off the beaten path and is only seen by a driver entering Exeter from High Street at his or her peril of slamming into a pedestrian or vehicle in an often congested Water Street.
Pam Gjettum, HDC chairwoman, clearly demonstrated a lack of professionalism in her recorded interview with the Exeter News-Letter. "Outraged" at the audacity of Al Lampert to legitimately proceed with demolition, she stated, "I personally would never give him permission to do anything." This certainly brings into question her ability to continue functioning on the HDC where much of what is deliberated upon is subjective or opinion. She seems to be taking matters far too personally in a job that requires a collaborative approach to working with developers.
Wow, so the HDC chair seems to placing her thumb on the scale of justice in this case. The results seem to be costly and frustrating for the developer. This is an odd case history for touting the slogan that "Exeter is open for business"! Where is the oversight of this lack of professionalism and bending the code of ethics?
ReplyDeleteExeter selectmen do not have the courage to remove any committee person regardless of the reason. There have been members of some committees that haven't been to a meeting for years, and yet they remain on the committee.
ReplyDeleteAnd wait until after the "all boards" meeting, how the selectmen will pat themselves on their backs declaring that the boards are all on the same page working to bring development to Exeter.
I understand everyone's frustrations on this issue. One thing is that it is very hard for the town to get volunteers. Many boards do not have enough members or alternates. Sometimes it is hard to get a quorum for meetings. Being open for business doesn't mean we throw away all of the regulations. As for the building being a gateway to Exeter, you are assuming that everyone that comes into town is driving a car. What about tour buses, pedestrians, and bikers. We are one of the most walkable communities in New England. As for Al's plight that's a whole other story. Just because Al had a hard time with his development with the HDC doesn't mean that every board he met with gave him a hard time. Also you should be aware that in other towns such as Stratham the process can be even more cumbersome, more costly, and less business friendly. Look closely with what the Planning Board has approved in the last year or so. There was an approval for the YMCA, a new building on Holland Way that was approved in one meeting and a new building on Portsmouth Ave. None of these have been built yet but they have been approved. I'd rather look at the glass half full than half empty. Exeter is open for business within the regulations that the voters have approved which by the way they voted for a Historic District Commission. If the regulations aren't working then instead of talking about them work to change them.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the regulations that are necessarily the issue. Zoning and Planning generally work expeditiously to approve projects. Other commissions and committees rule by subjective "feelings." HDC is a case in point. They told Al he could demolish the building if he made a "commercially reasonable" attempt to save at least part of it. He made commercially reasonable attempt to save it, but was unable to do so. The key here is that "commercially reasonable" is not a defined term. The HDC knew that when they made the motion. They thought they would get to decide what it meant, but Al made that decision for them. Some of the HDC members didn't like his definition and blasted his decision in the paper. Is this "open for business?" "I'm thinking of a number from 1 to 100. Guess what it is, and keep coming back to us until you guess correctly." That is the game that these members were playing. Al decided not to play any longer. Good for him!
ReplyDeleteIf these HDC members and Heritage Commission members want to save places like this garage, then I suggest that they start saving their money and buy them. Then they can pay the taxes on them and leave them as they stand.