Rebuttal to follow in a day or so....
P.O. Box 984
Block Island RI 02807
401/466-5995
February 22, 2005
Gerald Pierce
Block Island Economic Development
PO Box 619
Block Island RI 02807
Dear Gerry:
I am writing to make suggestions about the West Side Road project. My original concerns focused on the environmental impact. Since learning more about the project, I now have grave concerns about the impact on affordable housing, the impact on the owner-residents, and the impact on the community’s affordable housing needs in the future.
This is one of the three largest single building developments in the Island’s entire history. This project involves the town’s resources and public funding. Many of our decisions will be irrevocable. We have to get it right and come up with a plant that a wide consensus of the community supports. My interest, since I first heard about the project, has been to make it one that truly meets our needs, serves the needs of the future owners of the units, and respects the natural environment that each of us here is fortunate to experience.
In that spirit, I make the following suggestions:
1. This site has a steep ravine that the proposed plan seems to make no allowances for. It would be unwise - and incompatible with the values of Block Island – to alter, remove, or flatten the natural contours of the land.
2. This can be done by clustering some of the units and combining four to eight of them into single buildings. This will provide variety in the neighborhood and allow more open space – for recreation, gardening, and a sense of living in sync with the natural environment.
3. With such topography and for other reasons, it is not wise or necessary that every house have a basement.
4. Combining some of the units in one or two buildings allows for some occupants to save on heating costs. It will save on installation of sewer, water, and utilities, making the units more affordable. It will increase the size of yards for owners who want and need them. It will increase the number of residents with great views. As currently planned, the project has 70 percent or more of the homeowners looking at other houses from their windows, not at the Island’s natural beauty. Imaginative siting of the units can take care of this and save money as well.
5. Having all units of identical sizes is not in the interests of the future occupants nor does it help meet the housing needs of the Island to the maximum extent possible. A person living alone may not need two bedrooms, a second floor, and a basement for many years into the future, if ever. Yet to live in the proposed neighborhood, middle-income buyers would have no choice but to buy a two-bedroom unit. It is true that the basements and second floors would be unfinished, but the owners would have heating costs for that unused space. Their mortgage payments would reflect the additional construction costs. And what of buyers who expand their families and need three or four bedrooms? There is no place for them to move. And what of middle-aged couples with children who want to downsize when the children leave home? They will either have to stay in the same two-bedroom residence where they are or move off the Island.
6. By the same token, the lot sizes should not be uniform, but varied according to the unit sizes, to the topography of the land, and to wise planning. Some residents will want a traditional yard, but others will prefer a small plot because they will save on the purchase price and save the time and expense on yard maintenance. If everyone’s lot size is the same, no one’s needs will be met. If every lot size is the same, it is impossible to build within the contours of the land.
7. Clustering and combining some units will open up a significant amount of communal space. This will give young children space to play without having to cross West Side Road to the playground or to be driven elsewhere. It may also allow enough open space so that middle-school children and young teens to play ball or other games in their own neighborhood. It will allow all the children to grow up surrounded by the natural environment, as Island kids have for decades. If we make our single largest housing neighborhood one where this is not possible, we may lose the distinctive Island ethic of appreciation for the natural surroundings. The idea of same-sized lots for everyone is a suburban model, not an Island model. Knowledgeable planners have said that individual front lawns are the most wasted and unused space in America. On an island we obviously have limited space.
8. It’s important that affordable housing have opportunities for owners to downsize or upgrade. But the project as planned does not allow for that. That means that there will be a minimal amount of mobility in the neighborhood. There will be little turnover. Occupants will be locked in, and when we need to locate middle-income school teachers, medical workers, hospitality employees, or town employees in the future, the West Side Road project will have provided us no vacancies at all.
9. One of our most pressing affordable-housing needs is units for new school teachers, police officers, and health center employees who are single or childless and need housing for a couple of years until they decide whether they like living and working here. There are no units for those persons in the current plan.
10. In fact, as I understand the current qualification requirements, the newcomers would not even qualify for the ownership units. That means that we cannot use this new development of 20 affordable ownership units as a recruiting tool for the positions that we need to fill shortly.
11. Our second most pressing need is rental units for short-term employees who come to the Island. There are no units for these persons in the current plan. Substituting three to six rental units of varying sizes, in place of some ownership units, would meet this need and allow prospective buyers to become part of the neighborhood while they wait for an ownership residence to come on the market. It would allow flexibility for owners whose family situations change because of divorce or death or other factors. Management of rental units may be a challenge, but there are creative solutions: One would be to have the owner of one unit act as a rental manager (and thereby offset monthly mortgage payments). Another would be to combine rental management of the Searles Ball and West Side Road developments. A third would be to contract rental management to the Block Island Housing Board. Still a fourth is to contract it to the Women’s Development Corp.
12. The steep grade of the roads in the proposed plan may not meet town specifications. At any rate, it raises risks. And it raises construction and maintenance costs. It would be a shame if the homeowners association of this new neighborhood is saddled immediately with large expenses because of a road washout.
13. It is hard to see that emergency equipment can pass through the inclines currently proposed. Reconfiguring the units will eliminate this risk. The fire department should be asked to take a close look at the road configuration and provide a written report on whether it allows for necessary emergency access. That report should discuss whether the alternative cul-de-sac plan is an acceptable alternative.
14. The road in the current plan does not seem to allow adequate setbacks from the pond and wetlands, as required by town specification. They may not meet state Department of Environmental Management specifications.
15. The proposed plan contemplates an addition of 40 automobiles. The Island’s fragile environment can hardly accommodate that. The plan seems to send a message that two automobiles for each residence is the expected norm. The neighborhood would be enhanced for the residents, especially the children, if accommodations for some motor vehicles are in a cluster lot, much like the Searles Ball housing and the Old Harbor Meadow complex. Not every unit needs to have auto parking right next to it. By clustering some of the cars, there will be less wear and tear on the land, less uncontrolled run-off of oils and other auto discharges into the fragile wetland by West Side Road. And the neighborhood will be improved aesthetically.
16. And yet, the proposed plan seems to have no accommodations for visitor parking. By clustering some of the residents’ parking, that space could be used for owner-occupants and for some visitor parking. This might make the right-of-way to the Greenway trail accessible to more people. Why not provide space for one automobile adjoining some units and create a small cluster lot for other automobiles. The plan could also designate additional space for additional parking if it becomes necessary in the future?
17. A vast amount of the proposed plan is devoted to automobiles, either coming and going to the residences or parked. In fact, there is almost as much space devoted to motor vehicles as to human beings. This is an inefficient use of the acreage, and incompatible with the values of the community.
18. In the current unclustered proposals, most if not all of the units will not have adequate setbacks to allow an owner easily to expand the footprint or otherwise personalize the house. He or she would need to get zoning approval for a modest expansion. This would require moderate-income property owners probably to hire lawyers, engineers, and designers for a modest expansion. Clustering the units eliminates the need for setback variances in the future.
When I met with you and Mary Jane in January, she said that there would be no paving and no central air conditioning; I trust that this remains part of the plan.
Under the Community Development Block Grant interim financing grant, the project managers, before money is spent, must conduct an environmental review, with public comments. This provides the opportunity for us to consider these suggestions – and suggestions from others – and come up with a plan that a wide consensus of Islanders can support. We will then be able to have the plan presented to the Planning Board and Zoning Board with widespread support for it in the community.
The state agencies responsible for funding this project have told me that all of these modifications to the proposal can be considered at this point in the process and that the project plans can be altered accordingly. I plan to present these suggestions to the Planning Board. It would speed the process if we could reach an agreement before the project goes before the Planning Board.
Time is of the essence, for two reasons. The community needs the affordable housing right away. And all of us want to have an Island-based non-profit organization develop this project and fulfill the town’s needs rather than to risk leaving affordable-housing development to commercial developers who may use provisions of state law to bring to the community a bogus “affordable housing” venture.
Yours truly,
Robert Ellis Smith
Member, New Shoreham Town Council
Cc: Mary Jane Balser