, Newburyport, MA


February 21, 2013

NRA plan doesn't fit Newburyport brand

I’d like to add my voice to the growing discussion about the NRA’s development plans for the waterfront lots. I came into this discussion with an open mind, but after studying the issue in depth in a “balanced” approach, I find the current NRA proposal to be the wrong one for Newburyport’s central waterfront.

I’m reminded of a similar proposal a few years back in which the city administration at that time worked with Mass DOT on a proposal to rebuild High Street. Mass DOT consulted with the city on a plan, would own the majority of the costs and the city would reap the benefits. And then we saw “the plan” that called for four lanes of traffic, no trees, etc. The opposition rally was “High Street not a High-way.” In short, the “standard” plan as proposed by the state agency did not fit with Newburyport and thus we did not move forward with that plan. I can’t help but see the striking parallel to the NRA working with MassDevelopment (and their team of consultants: Abramson Assoc., Union Studio, etc.). What might work in Boston, Cambridge or Marina Bay doesn’t fit the Newburyport brand, specifically our history of communal use of our waterfront.

Additionally, not only is the size and scope of the proposal out of proportion to the voters’ wishes, but more importantly, this project is non-compliant with every regulation enacted for clean water, tideland use restriction and other environmental issues (think highly contaminated soil meets Clean Water Act). This project, as presently defined, would subject the taxpayers of Newburyport to the potential of long-term litigation from federal and state agencies, citizens groups and the unlucky developer once all the restrictions are publicly disclosed.

To make its case, the NRA has consistently floated the notion that this project could be worth $20 million or more. The fact is the City of Newburyport would only see a small fraction (maybe 2 to 4 percent) of that money. The big money is made by the developer and those involved in selling the condos or the commercial space. In short, there is little to no long-term upside for the citizens/taxpayers for having a building on these lots. These lots are already generating revenue. The NRA currently takes in a bit less than $100K a year for their portion of parking revenues as a result of the city’s implementation of paid parking, which they are spending on consultants in support of this proposal.

Text Only | Photo Reprints

NDN Video
Under Armour Launches Biggest Women's Campaign with Inspiring Ad NYPD chokehold death of Eric Garner was homicide: medical examiner Christina Aguilera Pulls a Demi Moore! Man with no arms throws first pitch Chapter Two: Composing for a film in retirement Is Justin Bieber Dating a Model? Guardians of the Galaxy (Trailer) 'Sharknado 2:' Hottest Memes Surfing The Net Snoop Dogg Narrating Animal Footage Is Perfect Raw: Obama Gets Hug From Special Olympian Recapping a Blockbuster MLB Trade Deadline Tigers Acquire David Price - @TheBuzzeronFOX Russell Brand Slams Sean Hannity Over Gaza Conflict Segment Woman's Dive Goes Terribly Wrong Brian Williams Reports on Daughter Allison Williams' 'Peter Pan' Casting News Did Jimmy Fallon Look Up Heidi Klum's Dress? What Drama? Miranda Kerr Poses Topless Plane crashes in San Diego Costco parking lot Justin Bieber Takes To Instagram To Diss Orlando Bloom You Won't Believe the Celeb Cameos in "Sharknado 2"
Special Features
NRA Waterfront Plans