[SBC] Comments on proposed PUD B-1 Zoning Amendment

[Ron Newman]

To the Planning Board and the Land Use Committee of the Board of  
Aldermen, regarding the proposed PUD-B1 Zoning Amendment:

Although I support higher-density development on the MaxPak property,  
I urge the Planning Board not to recommend the proposed zoning, and  
the Board of Aldermen not to enact it, until the following changes  
are made to the attached Development Covenant:


1) Section 3A of the Covenant allows the Developer to use the  
undeveloped portion of the Community Path (the abandoned railroad  
right-of-way) as a construction access road for the first two years  
of the project, requiring the Developer only to "leave the Community  
Path in the same or better condition as the Path is in as of the date  
of this Covenant".   I

I do not object to the Developer using the right-of-way in this  
manner, but the Covenant does not provide sufficient safeguards to  
ensure that this does not impede or delay the Path extension.    The  
Developer should be required to REMOVE all of the railroad tracks and  
ties now on the right-of-way BEFORE building any temporary  
construction road.  This way, the Path extension can benefit from the  
Developer's actions.   Allowing the Developer to build a construction  
road ON TOP OF the existing tracks can only put another roadblock in  
the way of Path extension, as it is one more thing that will have to  
be removed eventually.

The covenant should also include a penalty, to be paid by the  
Developer to the City, if the Developer does not cease using the  
right-of-way within the agreed time limit.  The City can use this  
penalty money can be used for Path construction.


2) Section 6 of the Covenant allows the Developer to enact  
unspecified future regulations on bicycles and dogs within the  
development.   This language should be changed to require that the  
Developer provide an unimpeded route through the development at all  
times, usable by bicyclists without their needing to dismount or walk  
their bicycles, to move between the Community Path and Lowell  
Street.   This condition also needs to be binding on all future  
owners (e.g. the condominium association that will remain once the  
Developer has divested its interest in the property).


3) Section 6 also requires the Developer to provide only one access  
point from the Community Path, and a second one "if feasible".  This  
should be changed to require the Developer to provide four access  
points, as agreed to in community meetings and as shown on the  
Developer's proposed map.


4) The Developer, the City, and neighbors should hold a meeting in  
the local neighborhood to fully discuss the Covenant before this  
Zoning Amendment is approved.


In addition, the Developer's proposal shows only residential  
development on this site.   The zoning should allow for small shops  
or cafes along the Community Path edge of the development, which  
would be useful to residents of the development, residents of  
surrounding neighborhoods, visitors to the proposed public park, and  
users of the Community Path.

Sincerely,
Ron Newman
18 Day Street #310
Somerville, MA  02144
Member, Somerville Bicycle Committee