| |
 |
| |
|
By Jeanette McCarthy
Guest Columnist
Re-Printed From The Daily News Tribune May 30, 2002 |
In my 19 years as an attorney in the City of Waltham, I have
never seen a more detrimental and far-reaching zoning proposal
than the one before us.
Why?
In 1900, the city of Waltham deeded the right side of Hope Avenue
to the Waltham Hospital for $50 on the condition that the land
be used "for Hospital purposes only."
The developers have crafted a new kind of zoning district for
our city, which will redevelop the entire 18.6 acre hospital
parcel into two zoning districts, one on either side of Hope
Avenue.
These requested zone changes present various dangers to the
city of Waltham Community:
1. Uniformity of Zoning- Zoning districts by
law must promote uniform uses. The developers are demanding
that multifamily dwellings and educational uses and assisted
living facilities and business and professional offices and
Banks and research labs be included in the zone on which the
hospital is located and that assisted living facilities and
nursing homes and research labs be included in the zone where
the luxury apartments are proposed. Mixing all of these different
uses within the zone is not good policy. Real estate speculation
should not be the basis for the establishment of city-wide zoning
districts.
2. Density- Developers propose 360 luxury apartments
(now 348) on the 4.8 acre hospital parking lot site. The Indian
Ridge proposal at the Wal-lex, proposes 300 units on 22 acres.
Imagine 48 more apartments (348), on one quarter of the India
Ridge parcel.
3. Impact on Neighborhoods - Currently Prospect
and South Streets are traveled to capacity. On-street parking
on the side streets now is terrible. Now add the traffic effect
of a new elementary school on South Street with the proposed
348 luxury apartments and the loss of 700 parking spaces. Developers
propose to construct a parking garage for 450 cars.
4. Zoning Precedent - Since these zoning districts
will now apply across the city, this hospital redevelopment
proposal can be utilized by of other real estate developers
in the future I would like to bring to your attention the following
parcels of land that could be potentially changed by this zoning
precedent Stigmatine Espousal Center, Olympus Hospital, Gaebler
Hospital, Fernald School and UMASS Field Station. Each of these
sites now has large tracts of open space, together with buildings
used for hospital educational, research, dormitory or philanthropic
purposes.
Each of the sites could potentially contain luxury apartments,
hospitals, assisted living facilities, research labs, business
and professional offices, dormitories, assisted living facilities
and nursing homes.
5. Restrictive Covenants and Oversight by the City
- Normally the city that a development prospectus be filed by
the developer, which details the impact on the neighborhood
and city services. Based upon the impacts, the city generally
imposes conditions via a special permit process. Since neither
the owners, nor the developers are the petitioners here, imposition
of conditions would be difficult.
The developers offer restrictive covenants, which have no teeth.
These restrictive covenants do not protect the citizens of Waltham
from the effects of the redevelopment and/or over development
of this parcel.
6. Impact on G.L.M. c. 40B (Affordable Housing)
- The developers propose 5 per cent affordable housing offsite
at some unknown location. By allowing 348 luxury apartments
on only 4.8 acres with only 17 affordable housing units, the
city is placed in a worse position with regard to meeting the
requirements of Chapter 40B. Waltham does not need any more
luxury apartments. Waltham needs more moderate and affordable
units.
7. Real Estate Tax Precedent - Since the hospital
real estate is being transferred from a nonprofit entity, to
a private entity, real estate taxes would now be owed to the
city on the hospital land. The developers are asking the city
to waive the taxes assessed on the hospital land and buildings.
8 Danger to the long-term Use of the site as a Hospital-
These requested zone changes present various dangers to the
long-term use of the property as a hospital for the Waltham
community.
For the first time since 1900, the city Council is being asked
to negate the actions of our predecessors in this City Council,
whose gifts of city land and whose vision provided the Waltham
community with a hospital for over one hundred years. The city
Council is being asked by private developers to change the use
of the hospital land to include other uses, not related to hospital
uses. The developers are not just proposing construction of
apartments on the parking lot and a parking garage. They are
proposing the redevelopment of the of the entire hospital site,
the whole hill.
Although a 50 year lease with extensions for $1 per year has
been touted by the developers, those terms cannot be considered
as part of a zone change request. The requested zone changes
place the tenant at a higher risk because the property is potentially
more valuable with the hospital closed. I have been advocating
that the Waltham Hospital must have independent security to
continue to provide quality care and a fair chance to survive
as a hospital. We must protect and secure the use of that property
as a hospital and remove the hospital land from the requested
zone change.
Not only are we being asked to repeat the mistakes of the past,
such as, give us all of your real estate and trust us (as was
done with CareGroup) approval of this zone change would compound
the mistakes of the past. Give us all of your real estate and
trust us, give us all of the zoning relief we want up front
and trust us, otherwise we will close your hospital.
If I voted to approve the changes to the use of the hospital
land and the redevelopment zones, I would be abrogating my public
responsibilities.
Our hospital is worth saving. I will not compromise the current
zoning of the site on which the hospital is located.
Since the redevelopment proposal before us, neither protects
the hospital nor the City of Waltham, my vote must be no.
Jeannette A. McCarthy
City Councilor Jeannette A. McCarthy cat one of two votes against rezoning the hospital land, which passed the City Council Wednesday morning with 10 votes in favor.
|
|
|
