New Convenience Store

[Matt M]

I have gotten clarification on the exception.  Anyone could open a convenience store there now legally under the overlay.  The property originally had a usage of Car Wash Full Service, but the overlay overrides that essentially.  The exception is for the car wash not a convenience store.  That being said, would there be the same concern of subsequent "convenience stores" that could possibly open in the event that Silas fails?  In my opinion (for whatever that is worth) that possibility already exists.

[thelakelander]

^That's what I've been saying the entire thread. For more clarification, I posted whats allowed under the CCG-S zoning with links to municode for proof a couple of pages ago.

[Sigma]

I met with Silas again today and explained to him that renderings will help people visualize the space better.  I also advised that he should possibly even have process maps of the operation etc.  Silas is going to meet with Contentdg tomorrow.  He is open to whatever he needs to do to make it work.

Thank you, Matt.  Since I work in commercial real estate development, the comments, opinions, and concerns voiced here are calm compared to what I've seen and heard on some other projects.  Its natural for the neighbors and surrounding community to become involved and have a say-so.  Professional developers pay attention and work with communities.  Exhaustive at times.

I will be more than happy to assist in anyway I can.  Very glad to see Silas working in a collaborative effort.  

[thelakelander]

Hopefully, the collaborative effort discussed here will be done with other potential commercial projects in the community.

[stephendare]

Continuing in the same positive vein.

And of course backed up by the only thing that really makes the opinions matter, spending consumer dollars at the places you hope to influence.

Its great to see a positive citizens group doing something with a little professional development behind the suggestions at last.   Good work Dan B and Lake and Jason.

And you too Matt.

[nvrenuf]

Stephen, would you please elaborate on your statement regarding Fusion? In a separate thread if need be. We were so excited about the concept that we've been supporting it since before it opened. We continue to inform our friends and neighbors about this gem on Pearl St. Miro is extremely gracious and responds well to suggestions to improve his offerings in order to increase business.

[Matt M]

I think that it could be assumed that since Silas was rejected last time that SPAR and HPC are likely to raise the same opposition this time around.  If left to the powers that be it is likely this will be denied.  If anyone feels like they want to support Silas, it would be imperative that you attend the hearing on Thursday Nov 12th.

[fsu813]

i second that

[thelakelander]

Matt, why was it rejected last time?  He would stand a better chance of getting it approved this time, if he can respond to their reasons for rejection to discredit their argument for denial.

[Johnny]

Also, how long ago was it that it was denied?

[Matt M]

The rejection reason he was given is because it is an illegal use.  It is only an illegal use because of the overlay to which he asking for an exception.  The logic is somewhat circular I guess.  He didn't really have any other information.  If he can show his ideas through renderings and has the backing of the neighbors it may help.

It was denied two years ago.

[Dan B]

a year or two ago Johnny.

Lake, I have asked around, and about as good an answer as I got was "because its against the overlay".

[Matt M]

I just spoke to Silas again to confirm and the Planning Board told him they made the decision based solely on SPAR's and HPC's recommendations.

[stephendare]

I just spoke with Lisa Shepard from the Historic Commission.

The issue just came back up before their board, with SPAR voicing objections to the new business opening, and that is the only feedback that the historic commission has heard from the neighborhood.

It was discussed amongst the board members, including Lisa Simon I would presume, that there might be a nuisance factor for a car wash to be open in a residential neighborhood, which the duly noted and sent a report back to planning.

They have not received a COA application or a plan review, and their only real concern was based not on the historical substance but on the concerns of the neighbors (apparently expressed by SPAR)

As a result they are on record opposing the exception, but they seem to have doubt that the basis of the objection is enough to deny the use. 

Anyways, they havent heard back from the planning commission yet, whose hands it is in.

SPAR is the only agency that is provided a copy of the historic commission book, which lists the issues and times and meetings and decisions, because they inherited that from the Historic Springfield Community Council, and because they are the only group in the neighborhood who has asked for it.

They are supposed to make that information aware to the rest of the community.

I chatted with Lisa about getting all of that in a digital format so that everyone could have access to the same information.

[jason_contentdg]

We'll be meeting with Silas tomorrow and hopefully helping him submit a full application showing design intent and will take any guess work out of SPAR and Historic Commission. 

There will be ways to buffer the site from the residential side of the car wash.

Saying this site is in a residential neighborhood isn't quite correct, they make it sound like it is in the middle of homes, surrounded on each side, which we know is not the case.

It will be sad if Silas has a well thought out site and building design, solid business plan, and the needed equipment, and still gets turned down.  I'd much rather have a place where I can grab a cup of coffee, get my car washed while reading the paper then another lot rotting away while someone waits for the market to change....