What are we voting on at the upcoming STM?

If you think that we are voting on Tuesday night to build a new larger CVS store with a drive-through pharmacy or a new JCrew store, you are incorrect and should read the rest of this article.

The vote at the Special Town Meeting on Tuesday, February 3 is solely to approve the proposed zoning change from the current residential zone to a commercial/business zone.... Nothing else!  This vote does not involve approval of the actual project details such as the new larger CVS store with a drive-through pharmacy. 

Town residents will not get an opportunity in the future to vote on the specifics for this project.  If this zoning change is approved, town residents will only be able to make comments at a future Planning Board Public Hearing but will not be able to vote yes or no on the specific project.

Here is the warrant article that town residents will be voting on at Tuesday's meeting:

 _____________________________________________

ARTICLE 1.
To see if the Town will vote to change the zoning district in which the land described in this article is located from the Residence A District to the Business District, or take any other action relative thereto:

Beginning at a point at the northwest intersection of the existing 20’-0” easement with the property line of Parcel 2 as previously described by a curve to the left having a radius of two hundred eighty-six and 82/100 (286.82) feet, thence EASTERLY on other land now or formerly of Daniel E. Burbank, Jr., et al, eighty and 55/100 (80.55) feet; thence NORTHEASTERLY on land now or formerly of Daniel E. Burbank, Jr., et al, one hundred thirty-one and 90/100 (131.90) feet to land of The First Church of Christ Scientist; thence SOUTHERLY on said land of The First Church of Christ Scientist three hundred and 03/100 (300.03) feet to Williams Street; thence SOUTHWESTERLY on said Williams Street one hundred thirty-six and 16/100 (136.16) feet; thence SOUTHWESTERLY on said Williams Street and by a curve to the right having a radius of five hundred eighty-six and 82/100 (586.82) feet, one hundred sixty-four and 81/100 (164.81) feet to the southeasterly corner of the first parcel of land herein described; thence NORTHERLY on said first parcel of land herein described, three hundred and 3/100 (300.03) feet to a point of beginning. Consisting of 79,230 square feet (1.819 acres).

The property is now zoned residential; the shops would like to expand. Currently, business use is not allowed in a residential zone. A zone change to business is needed to expand.  This article requires a two-thirds vote.

_____________________________________________

If this zoning change is approved, Grove Property will then move forward with detailed design work followed by a Planning Board "site and design" review.  During this review, the Planning Board will make specific recommendations for changes in the design and/or stipulations before they grant approval and issue a building permit.  If the Planning Board wants to see specific design changes, Grove Properties can either accept them or take the town to court for mediation of the differences.

Another option is that Grove Property can simply decide to cancel the project and then sell the now commercially zoned property to a different developer.  Who knows what might happen then.....

Many people are voting YES because they want a drive-through CVS or JCrew.... this is not what is being decided on Tuesday night. 

One Longmeadow Planning Board member- Heather LaPorte at the January 7 Public Hearing stated she was in favor of the zoning change because she liked the idea of a CVS with a drive-through pharmacy window.  Based upon her comments this appeared to be one of the primary reasons that she voted YES to recommend the proposed zoning change.  It turns out that her thinking was not much different from the other Planning Board members based upon their comments.  The Planning Board should have been voting on the proposal to make a zoning change for this property to commercial from residential and its impact on the surrounding area not the merits of the proposed project details.

In a recent letter-to-the-editor Select Board member Alex Grant wanted Grove Property to put their promises in writing.  That is not going to happen.  Grove Property positioned the presentation of this project such that they could offer all sorts of  "benefits" upfront if town residents voted to grant the zoning change.   There is no guarantee that the Grove Property plans as proposed will be implemented.

Come as an informed voter to the Special Town Meeting on Tuesday, February 3 at 7 PM in the Longmeadow High School gymnasium.

Get It In Writing!

This Letter-to-the-Editor was submitted to the Longmeadow Buzz blog by Alex Grant, town resident and Longmeadow Select Board member.

__________________________________________________

When the Longmeadow Shops zoning change request goes for a vote again on February 3, voters will not be called upon to approve or disapprove the Shops’ expansion plan.  Instead, the question will be whether to allow Grove Property Fund LLC or some subsequent owner to pursue commercial development more or less as it sees fit.

Even so, Grove Property and its allies have made some big promises: a drive-through CVS, the continued existence of the CVS on Longmeadow Street, and maintaining the farmer’s market in the parking lot of the Shops.  From these promises, we have been led to believe that nothing but goodness will come from the zoning change and the expansion plan.  There is just one catch.  None of the promises I just mentioned are in writing, and they are not guaranteed.

If your reason for voting for the zoning change is a drive-through CVS, if you truly believe that the infirm and the sick will benefit from such a mega-pharmacy, wouldn’t it be a good idea to know that such a CVS will in fact occupy that space?  When Grove Property came before the Select Board in July, a contract with CVS for the drive-through pharmacy was not in place.  At the November town meeting, the contract was not in place.  In January, when Grove Property came back before the Select Board, the contract was still not in place.

Nonetheless, the representative of Grove Property tells us that CVS is itching to expand its operations at the Shops and to build a drive-through pharmacy.  If that is so, and this expanded CVS is the key selling point to the whole proposal, why is there such uncertainty?  The most we have heard is that Grove Property will call CVS after the zoning change is passed.

Similarly, Grove Property tells us that CVS has no plans to close its Longmeadow Street location if CVS expands at the Shops.  Grove Property’s representatives have said that CVS sees the two locations as two separate markets.  But nary a word has been heard from CVS.  There is nothing in writing that says that the Longmeadow Street CVS will survive. 

Finally, we have been told that Grove Property plans to allow the farmer’s market to continue its operations with the new configuration.  If that is important to you, why not get that promise in writing?  Why not make the commitment enforceable?

Business interests like Grove Property and CVS make important decisions when they have signed commitments in writing.  We should do the same.  Why allow these corporations to change their minds, if these promises are important to voters’ decisions?  Make no mistake, Grove Property wants to do a deal with Longmeadow voters.  Voters have this one point of leverage to obtain the things that are important to them.  Our decision to allow the zoning change would be binding on us and essentially irreversible.  In exchange, are we going to accept vague assurances on the essential points of this deal?

When handling our own money, we would never enter into an important deal without getting the deal signed and in writing.  Why should we be so trusting, so credulous, so careless when we enter into a deal on behalf of the Town?

Personally, I don’t see the crying need for this expansion, and I fear that expansion will exacerbate the existing traffic and parking problems at the Shops, especially since a traffic study has not yet been done.  I believe that Longmeadow can be a great place to live without this added commercial development, and I also believe that ever-increasing traffic congestion represents the biggest threat to our quality of life.

But I recognize that others are more bullish on the benefits of this plan, if it is enacted as it has been presented.  If we are going to bear the burden of more drivers on our roads, if we are going to run the risk that this expansion will require other, expensive design changes to the road system around Big Y and the Shops, why not insist that we get what has been promised to us?  If we are going to vote for this change because people want a drive-through CVS, let’s get it in writing.  If the other CVS location and the farmer’s market are part of this deal, let’s get that in writing too.  If Grove Property and CVS cannot put their assurances in writing, then we should vote no.

__________________________________________
 

Alex J. Grant is a member of the Longmeadow Select Board. 
His email address is agrant@longmeadow.org.

Vote No to Shops Expansion on February 3

This "letter to the editor" was submitted to the LongmeadowBuzz blog by Paul Santaniello, Longmeadow resident and member of the Longmeadow Select Board.

_________________________________________________________
 

I plan on voting NO on the expansion of the Longmeadow Shops on February 3rd.  I plan on voting NO because we are asking to make a decision that will have a long term impact on Longmeadow, without knowing what any of the potential impacts are until we approve the expansion.  The process is backwards.


At the Planning Board Public Forum on January 7th, there was much discussion of the process.  One point hit home more than any other.  Paraphrasing a Planning Board member, “we may decide, after the traffic study is done, we may approve only one store instead of three.  We would most likely be sued…”  In other words, unless the Planning board approves what the petitioners want, we have the potential to be sued as a town.

That aside, we have no idea of  the traffic impact by adding three stores (four really when the CVS is four times the size of the current location) to the already busy Bliss/Williams intersection.  We have no idea of any potential infrastructure improvements that the Town (you and me) will have to pay for to alleviate any potential issues.

The process is backwards.  It’s just the way it is.  I have full faith in the Planning Board to do their best to protect the Town from any potential negative impacts, but once Town Meeting approves the zone change, it places the Town in a defensive position.  That is a terrible position to “negotiate” from.

If the owner of The Shops wants to be the true blue property owner it claims to be, why don’t they offer numbers as to the potential traffic that the expansion will generate?  If they are looking to CVS, JCREW, et al, to occupy the new space, why don’t they ask for the average trips per hour they expect (data the store have) and provide that now?

While we talk about a drive thru CVS and all the medical advantages of having one in town, the Manager of The Shops has stated publicly that CVS will not commit to a lease without having the zone change in hand.  Nor do we really know any of the other two stores coming in.

At Town Meeting, you are NOT approving a CVS.  You are NOT approving a JCrew.  You are voting on a massive extension of the one of the most traveled roads in town.  There is no guarantee that CVS or any other pharmacy will be placed there. Don’t let this misinformation confuse what we will be asked to vote upon.

While I believe the process is backwards, I also believe there could be a little more truth in the details of what will actually happen if this vote passes. The Shops have done a great job in marketing the expansion.  I just wish they would have spent half as much time finding out and telling us what the facts are.

Vote NO on February 3rd.

Paul Santaniello
179 Edgewood Ave
Longmeadow, MA

Vote NO on Proposed Zoning Change

This "letter to the editor" was submitted to the LongmeadowBuzz blog by Jayne K. Benmosché of Longmeadow, MA.

 _________________________________________________
 

1. A NO vote would assure that additional traffic congestion in and around the three schools located near the shops will not be  additionally challenged, thereby not endangering the safe passage of school children to/from Blueberry Hill School, Longmeadow High School, and Williams Middle School.
2. A NO vote would maintain that the current CVS at the shops not be moved to the proposed residential lot with a larger building and a drive thru pharmacy.  There are two CVS stores in our town which are more than adequate to service the resident’s needs.  CVS is NOT a preferred pharmacy for disabled persons or seniors on Part D prescription coverage.  Most seniors with AARP currently drive two miles from the shops to Walgreen’s in East Longmeadow or use the pharmacy at Big Y for their prescription needs.  Another concern would be a Minute Clinic added to the store’s services.  Sick individuals belong in a physician’s office not in a busy store with shoppers.
3. A NO vote would not compromise the residential areas that abut the property.  Those homes located on Williams Street would have increased road traffic, delivery truck noise, and increased difficulty gaining entrance and exit of their homes.
4. A NO vote does NOT interfere with Grove Properties ability to redesign the current parking structures of the shops.  They do NOT need additional stores to accomplish this. This area has had a substantial increase in traffic since adding another restaurant on site.  Grove Property knew in advance this would create increased need for additional parking spaces.
5. A NO vote would allow our town to safely utilize ALL the current stores in Williams Place, Big Y, and the Longmeadow Shops.  Increasing the size of the current shops would interfere with the existing flow of traffic that traverses between the both sides from Bliss to Williams Street and vice versa.  There are currently 12 entrances/exits in the oval with two crosswalks.
6. A NO vote would allow consideration be given to hiring an urban planning company to get a traffic safety study done BEFORE a zoning change is approved.

Please attend the Longmeadow Special Town Meeting on Tuesday, February 3 at 7 PM in the Longmeadow High School Gymnasium and VOTE NO!

Jayne K. Benmosché
Longmeadow, MA

Local Tempest in a Teapot

This "letter to the editor" was submitted to the LongmeadowBuzz blog by Marjorie Morgan of Longmeadow, MA.

 _________________________________________________

Our local Tempest in a Teapot pales to many events taking place in our world.  I refer to the proposed expansion of the Longmeadow Shops, AKA a LifeStyle Center.

This tempest is important to our town.  The town of Longmeadow has grown over the years.  There are no more dirt roads and few meadows as some like to recall.  And, that is exactly my point.  We can no longer make major decisions regarding our town’s geographical layout as was done in the 50's, 60's, 70's and so on.  We are now a small urban area with little room and that space should be used wisely.

If you were hearty enough to come out for the Planning Board meeting on January 6th or watched it on LCTV, you might have witnessed what I observed.  I watched a well-meaning but mostly uninformed group dithering with thoughts and ideas that for the most parts are outdated or narrow.  We cannot be stuck in "old days" of "we know the folks, and what the heck, let's just approve it...after all, they are our neighbors and a doctor said it is a good idea."

I am in no way saying that the present set-up is not crowded and dangerous or  that a drive-thru is a bad idea.  I am saying that the step of supporting this and a potential change of zoning should be done with the consultation of a neutral urban planner and a traffic study.  If and when Brightwood Hardware closes and The Big Y expands, another element in thrown into the mix.

The Planning Board is way over their heads. As a town we must insist that someone who understands urban planning consult as well as a traffic study before we embark on a LifeStyle Center that haunts us for years.

In closing, I must add that newly constructed pharmacies tend to add a "Doc In A Box" staffed with a nurse that sees many different illnesses....some that will be contagious. So that does negate the public health issue that seems to have taken on the fear of ebola.

At the Town Meeting, Vote No until the concept is looked at by good planners.  This is not 1950.

Marjorie Morgan
Longmeadow

Vote NO at the Special Town Meeting

I have now watched multiple presentations by Grove Properties about their plans for expansion of the Longmeadow Shops and feel that I understand the project and its objectives quite well.  I believe that one of the key issues- safety and parking in the Longmeadow Shops area has been well addressed.

However, given the size of this project, I'm expecting that there will be a significant increase in the traffic flow from outside our town to the Longmeadow Shops if this zoning change and expansion are approved …. so I have a major concern that has not been well addressed or considered.  There will be a significant increase in overall traffic flow and subsequent congestion- both in the immediate area of the Longmeadow Shops as well as other streets in our town.

In recent years Longmeadow has been experiencing a significant increase in drive-through traffic from East Longmeadow, Enfield and other surrounding towns- that impact overall traffic on our residential streets.  At certain times of the day (morning/ mid-late afternoon) the major streets in Longmeadow such as Longmeadow Street, Converse Street, Williams Street and others become very busy- sometimes with lengthy backups.

The Select Board has recently considered the closing of Quinnektuk Road because of increased vehicle traffic because this street is being used as a shortcut.  As our major streets experience increased traffic volume, this same pattern will continue to be repeated in other areas of town.

The Planning Board knows that there are already two major projects currently underway that will significantly impact traffic on our already congested major streets in town- the MGM casino and the large apartment complex being built off Shaker Road on Mayfair Drive in Enfield.  This Mayfair Place project consists of 340 apartments and construction has already begun.

Mayfield Place Development
(Shaker Road/ Route 192, Enfield, CT)

Schematic drawing- Mayfield Place Project Plans

While Longmeadow will receive significant money as a surrounding community to mitigate the expected traffic and safety issues related to the MGM casino, Longmeadow was not allowed to influence the size and scope of the Mayfair Place project.  This Mayfair Place project is likely to significantly affect the volume of traffic on our town streets.  A traffic study for this project conducted by Bubaris Traffic Associates in February 2013 estimated between 170 - 205 vehicle trips per hour during morning and afternoon peak periods with 70% of the volume heading north toward Longmeadow or returning south from Longmeadow on Route 192 (Shaker Road).

I do agree that the Longmeadow Shops has for many years provided a great service and resource to our town.  However, one of the many reasons that my family and I have lived in Longmeadow for 35 years and have paid its high property taxes is the low level of traffic on our town streets.  I do not want to see the bumper-to-bumper traffic that is experienced in many surrounding towns and it appears that this will be happening to Longmeadow in the not too distant future.

At the February 3 Special Town Meeting voters will have a “second chance” to decide whether or not to allow this proposed zoning change and expansion.  If the February 3 Special Town Meeting again decides to reject the zoning change, Massachusetts General Law allows the petitioner to come again via a citizen petition to the Annual Town Meeting in May as long as the Planning Board continues to submit a positive recommendation on this zone change as they did (5-0) after the Public Hearing on January 7.

The Town of Longmeadow needs to better understand the full impact of the MGM and Mayfair Place projects on traffic flow in our town before we allow this type of zoning change to take place.

Please plan to attend this important Special Town Meeting
on February 3 and Vote NO.

James R. Moran
48 Avondale Road
Longmeadow, MA 01106

Potential School Safety Issue

This is a letter recently sent to Longmeadow School Committee members by Mark Gold/ Longmeadow Select Board member about the potential safety issue to our school children if the Longmeadow Shops residential to commercial rezoning petition is granted.

____________________________________________________

Dear School Committee members,

At a Special town meeting that will be held on February 3, 2015, the residents of the town of Longmeadow will be acting on a petition to rezone additional property adjacent to the Longmeadow Shops from residential to commercial.  This rezoning petition is being brought before town residents by Grove Properties, the owners of the Longmeadow Shops, for the purpose of adding additional commercial businesses.

Along with those businesses will come a significant increase in traffic.  That traffic will most certainly have an impact on the safety of students in both Blueberry Hill elementary school and Longmeadow High School.  Of particular concern to the school committee members should be the safety of students who must cross Bliss Road to participate in athletics on Russell Field.   The crossing situation there is already tenuous, and additional traffic will only make that crossing more dangerous.  At Blueberry Hill School, added traffic turning into the shops will impact students who walk to school from areas east of the shops, and after school student pick-up, which already has traffic backed up to Bliss Road on many days, will be further impaired by the additional traffic that 20,000 sq. ft. of new retail space will generate.

I urge the School Committee, as elected town officials entrusted with the safety of our students, to consider the impact that additional vehicles will have and to make your concerns known to the town meeting as it considers a proposal that will likely compromise the safety of students attending these two schools.

Mark P. Gold

___________________________________________
 

Longmeadow residents are invited to submit "letters to the editor" for posting on the Longmeadow Buzz blog.  If you are interested in doing so, please see guidelines for such submissions.  There will be no anonymous comments allowed.  All comments and letters must be accompanied with name and address.
 

Longmeadow Needs a Fire Ladder Truck

The Longmeadow Fire Department does not have a ladder fire truck. When a fire requires aerial firefighting capabilities or a rescue that cannot be safely accomplished with a ladder leaning against the burning structure, the department must call on a neighboring community’s fire department to respond with their ladder truck. A year and a half ago during the major house fire on Frank Smith Road the response time was 20 minutes.

Not having a ladder truck puts our residents and firefighters at risk. Several years ago a firefighter fell through the roof fighting a fire. Longmeadow has several large structures in town that require aerial fighting capabilities from the churches to the various public and private schools. We also have several institutions in town that require special care in responding to fires such as Bay Path University, Jewish Geriatric Nursing Home, and Glen Meadows. Each of these institutions has pledged funds towards the purchase of a ladder truck. 

The last warrant article at the Town Meeting will be the purchase of the ladder truck for the fire department using the Fire Truck Fund, the pledges from town residents and organizations, and free cash.  

Please come to town meeting on Tuesday, November 18th at 7 PM and have your voice heard on the purchase of this vital piece of firefighting equipment.

Marie Angelides/ Longmeadow

___________________________________________

Below is the STM warrant article #18

ARTICLE 18.                                                           Citizen Petition

To see if the Town will vote to authorize the purchase of the Quint Fire Truck, an aerial firefighting apparatus with ladder capabilities at the cost of $752,000.00, or a greater or lesser sum, using the fire truck funds, previously approved by Town Meeting for the purchase of a fire truck, pledged donations and certified free cash expected to be $262,000.00, or a greater or lesser sum, or take any other action relative thereto.  

To request the purchase of the Quint Fire Truck, an aerial Firefighting Apparatus, which includes a ladder, during the fall 2014 special meeting. The truck will be purchased using the Fire Truck Fund, the special donations that have been pledged and the balance to be paid for with the certified free cash.

Springfield Republican Opposes Casinos in Massachusetts

Springfield Republican Opposes Casino in Massachusetts may seem contradictory to recent support expressed by The Republican newspaper for the proposed Springfield- MGM casino.  However, below is an 2008 Republican editorial expressing their opposition to casino gambling in Massachusetts. 

What has changed?

CASINO BENEFITS JUST FOOL'S GOLD

The Springfield Republican

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Odds of so-called "resort" casinos delivering busloads of tourists to attractions outside the perimeter of the gambling complexes are slim to none.

While supporters of Gov. Deval L. Patrick's proposal to establish three casinos - including one in Western Massachusetts - say casinos would provide an overall boost to tourism, that hasn't happened in Connecticut.

Just ask Ledyard, Conn., Mayor Frederic B. Allyn Jr., who governs in the shadow of Foxwoods casino. Beyond the two Dunkin' Donuts shops along Route 2, Allyn said, the 45,000 people who visit Foxwoods daily are "not stopping for anything."

During an interview for The Republican's four-part series "Rolling the Dice," which concluded yesterday, Allyn complained that the presence of a casino hasn't helped Ledyard a bit. He said his town of 15,000 residents still struggles to pave roads and repair infrastructure. Taxes are high - averaging $10,000 - and have driven many retirees away, he said.

If a "resort" casino were to be built in Palmer, as one would-be developer proposes, it's unlikely that casino-goers would stray from the confines of the casino. To suggest that tourists might expand their visit to the region to take in such attractions as Springfield's Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame or the museums at the Quadrangle is ridiculous.

There's no more unlikely conversation than the following: "Hey, let's hit the casino, then drive to the Museum of Fine Arts in Springfield, and then go to the Student Prince for dinner."

We believe in calling a spade a spade. Hopes that casinos will pump up local economies are false hopes.

There are many reasons why we're opposed to legalizing casino gambling in the Bay State. Casinos impose social costs that are higher than the financial benefits. The greatest gain in casino gambling goes to those who own the casinos, and the greatest loss with casino gambling comes for the people who wager there but who can least afford it - the elderly and the poor. Chasing casinos is like chasing fool's gold.... 

VOTE YES ON QUESTION 3! 

Potential Consequences of ATM Budget Amendment

This following letter was submitted by Marie Angelides, Chair- Longmeadow Select Board.
____________________________________________________________

On May 13th at 7:00 pm Longmeadow will hold its annual town meeting. This year it will be especially important for residents to come and have a voice in the decisions being made on the town budget. The town manager, Stephen Crane, the Departments, and committees worked hard this budget year to go from an over $600,000 projected deficit to a balanced budget that allowed for increased hours at the Adult Center and a new program in the elementary schools costing over $500,000. This balanced budget was $170,000 under the 2 ½ percent tax levy. The extra money was put towards infrastructure.

As you may have read in the papers, residents have not been happy with the School Committee’s decision to fund the literacy program in the elementary schools and charge tuition for full day kindergarten. The superintendent had a series of meetings emphasizing the importance of full day kindergarten, but prioritized funding for the “literacy program” instead that replaced teacher’s aides with certified teachers in each of the elementary schools to improve test scores.


At town meeting there will be an amendment on the floor asking for an additional $400,000 in the school budget to eliminate the tuition for full day kindergarten.   The residents believe that the funds in the Town’s Operational Stabilization Fund and/ or Free Cash should be used to pay for the tuition.

I will be speaking against the amendment. The Free Cash being referred to as a funding source is the projected Free Cash that is will not be certified until the Fall. Responsible fiscal policy is that any projected, Free Cash (unused funds budgets and projects) should not be used until certified after FY14 in September and that the money be used for non-recurring expenses such as Capital or emergencies such as the October 2011 storm. The Town also has a policy that states any unobligated Free Cash over $500,000 be placed in the Operational Stabilization Fund. Rating agencies such as Moody’s look very poorly on the use of projected uncertified Free Cash to balance an operating budget. Rating agencies recommend that a town have   5-10% of the general fund expenditures in the Operational Stabilization Fund. We are at 6%.

By ignoring our own fiscal policy and municipal finance best practices and use the Operational Stabilization Fund or uncertified Free Cash to balance an operating budget, we risk our credit rating and risk higher costs for borrowing in the future.

For the above reasons, if the amendment to fund full day kindergarten passes, the Select Board will be obliged to cut programs and staffing on the general government side of the budget. These are programs that benefit the entire town. The cuts will be noticeable and, in some cases severe. Raising taxes does not appear to be a reasonable option; taxpayers have already absorbed an increase in taxes to build the new high school.

Unfortunately, the choices here are difficult. If the residents want to cut programs, hours, and staffing to support a full day free kindergarten, the Select Board will move ahead with those cuts. In either case, the will of our community will prevail. I urge all of you as citizens to come to the Town Meeting and have your voice heard and your vote counted in this very important matter. 

Thank you,
Marie Angelides
Chair of the Longmeadow Select Board