COMMENTARY
Why Is Downtown Losing 160 Parking Spaces?
By FRANK WENDELL
April 24, 2014
At the conclusion of the March Town Council meeting, the Council held an executive session to discuss possible land acquisitions. It was explained that a developer, Patrick Hand, intended to buy the old Be-Lo grocery store property and the two adjacent parking lots. If he were to buy the property he would be willing to sell the town two 40’ x 105’ lots for public parking at the east end of the property and also property for a pedestrian mall in line with Strawberry Street in between two proposed buildings. But the town and Mr. Hand were unable to agree on a price. And even if the town did buy the two lots for parking, that would only supply 40 parking spaces, with a resulting loss of approximately 120 parking spaces. This would be a tremendous setback to all the merchants who have experienced a downtown resurgence of the past two years.
Mr. Hand is to be commended for his willingness to further invest in Cape Charles and for his shrewd business skills. The Town of Cape Charles, on the other hand, once again has a lot of unexplained missteps as to how we suddenly will be without the use of over 160 off-street parking spaces in the middle of our downtown/commercial district. And what do we do going forward to compensate for the lost use and at what cost?
At the April 7 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting, Mr. Hand explained that he had been working with the mayor, three members of Town Council, and some members of the Art Walk committee for six or seven months on his downtown project. So while the mayor and three Council members had been privy to the developer’s plans for six or seven months, three other members of Council had not.
I asked Mr. Hand who the three Council members were that he had been working with. He replied that he would rather not say.
Mr. Hand was seeking variances from the town on setbacks for construction, balconies, open space requirements, and most notably reduction of off-street parking requirements. The following Monday the Board of Zoning Appeals granted all four requests.
I have a few questions to ask at tonight’s (April 24) Town Council meeting:
- Who are the three Council members that have been working on this project for six or seven months?
- Why wasn’t the whole Council involved?
- Now that the developer has received the requested variances, and the town potentially is without the use of 160 parking spaces, is this the desired outcome of the six to seven months of collaboration between the developer and town officials?
- If the current asking price for the two parking lots is too high, what would be an acceptable price?
- What, if any, would be an acceptable price for the pedestrian mall?
- With the town spending approximately $300,000 over the past five years for a town planner and $700,000 for two town managers, shouldn’t we have received a plan that involved negotiating with the owner of this property instead of with the current developer?
- Why, for four years, did the town pay for a right of first refusal and then buy seven lots coming into town, but never tried to get a similar deal on much more important property downtown?
It is my opinion that the Town of Cape Charles needs to make smarter business decisions. The mayor and Council should schedule work sessions on the most important planning issues that the town is facing and instruct the Planning Commission to do likewise. However, most recent history is that these decisions are made in a vacuum with little or no public input or in a series of executive sessions.
A robust public discussion on the town’s comprehensive plan update would be a step in the right direction. However, it is up to the citizens to see that it is followed. “The cost of democracy is perpetual vigilance” (Thomas Jefferson).
Whether Cape Charles is deciding how much to spend on a sewage treatment plant and where to locate it, or what to do with an old school building, or whether or not to buy public parking in the commercial district, or whether the PSA sewer project will hurt downtown businesses, or deciding what our emergency health care options are — these types of important decisions should be thoroughly vetted in public forums before our officials make up their minds.
Cape Charles needs to make smart decisions about its future. Involve the public in the beginning of the decision-making process instead of asking them to rubber stamp bad decisions. This approach will undoubtedly yield results that are truly in the public’s best interest.
I hope to get some real answers tonight to my questions instead of a reply of “Don’t answer that” from any of my fellow public officials. Cape Charles and its citizens deserve nothing less than the collective best efforts of its elected and appointed officials. Sharing information rather than withholding it is a key component in making smart decisions as a governing body.
Frank Wendell is a member of Cape Charles Town Council and a candidate for mayor in the May 6 elections.
Submissions to COMMENTARY are welcome on any subject relevant to Cape Charles. Opinions expressed are those of the writer and not necessarily of this publication.
Mr. Wendell has made a great case for why we need a change of leadership on the Town Council. Frank will ensure that major decisions are openly discussed and all points of view considered before voting on major issues. He will end the backroom deals and hold real town hall meetings where citizens can hold an open dialogue with their elected officials. Will Mr. Proto do the same or will he continue the policy of the current administration? I would love to hear his platform.
Mr. Wendell makes some points. However, it’s a tough call for me about whether decisions by our elected officials (important or not) should be opened up to public discourse. We elect people to make those decisions. Should voters and non-voters alike be part of the forum process? What’s the value of our votes then? But, I’m also curious about who titled the piece. The 160 parking spaces that the downtown is allegedly losing are located on private property and have been so all along. People have trespassed (technically) and probably will continue to do so to the benefit of local merchants all along Mason Ave., who unfortunately have no off street parking at all. I’m on the BZA, I saw the 30% shallowness (compared to other commercial lots) of the Be-Lo property as a serious hardship, hence my vote for the variances. On the other hand (no pun), burdening that private property alone with the responsibility for the parking needs of the whole downtown area would have been a gross injustice amounting to a “taking” in my opinion.
The current town council never stops amazing me. SIX MONTHS of negotiations with a developer and not so much as a comment about the negotiations to the other town councilmen. Where were the meetings held? Were notes kept of them? Why the secrecy from the other councilmen? Just another example of why this crew, that views the town as their fiefdom, needs to be put out to pasture in just a few weeks. Get out to vote!
The fact that the town should have made a move a long time ago to purchase at least one of those parking lots is a problem for me. When BeLo was open they didn’t mind people parking in those lots to go into the Mason Avenue stores. Mr. Hand has already said cars would be towed away if they park in his lots. The town had bargaining power with Mr. Hand and as usual did nothing.
Elections are coming folks so please cast your votes for Wendell, Gay, Mitchell, and myself if you want to see the change this town deserves — governmental transparency, lower taxes, lower utility bills, and no back-room deals.
And — a group of councilmen that will listen to the needs of the citizens.
I have to attend play rehearsals at the Palace on Saturday mornings, so I get in around 9:45 or so. Even at this early time, parking on both sides of Mason starts to fill up, and by noon, folks are spilling over into off-street lots to park. And this is not even the “busy” season. It seems that downtown parking is one of the fundamental infrastructure issues that should be addressed by Town Council. Disturbingly, the Mayor and her cohorts once again (once more for the road) have met in the dark, back rooms to weave yet another dubious deal. Obviously, they feel they have to make these decisions in private because the indigenous populace as well as fellow members of council is incapable of grasping the implications of such a deal (although, we keep electing the same people, so maybe they’re right). As Mr. Wendell and Mr. Bauman point out, the property has been privately held for a long time. Understanding that the public has been using those lots as spillover for so many years, why did the Town stupidly not attempt to acquire that property? As a Cape Charles citizen, do you ever get the feeling you’re a character in a James Dickey novel, in a canoe, heading for the rapids?
As usual, instead of assuming responsibility and getting their hands dirty, the Town sits, arms folded awaiting the latest developer/savior to rescue them (who will be this year’s recipient of the Jim Alberts award?). At this point, the deal is done, and it’s no longer the private sector’s responsibility to fix the Mayor’s mistakes — Mr. Hand’s only allegiance should be to the viability of his project. Mr. Gay also brings up a good point: where does the Cape Charles Business Association stand on this, and were they privy to this plan before 50% of Council was? As Mayor Sullivan’s handpicked successor, does Mr. Proto plan to continue the retiree’s scorched earth policy of waste and abuse? I hear banjos — paddle faster!
A quorum is defined as: the number as a majority of officers or members of a body that when duly assembled is legally competent to transact business. An applicant and three council members “talking it over” in the coffee shop, or wherever this “talking it over” took place in my humble, non legal opinion does not constitute “a majority” or “duly assembled.” When I went to Richmond to get my certification in Town Planning we were cautioned to avoid discussing town business outside of an official planning commission meeting. We were told it was inherently illegal. It was referred to as an “ad hoc” (synonym: un-planned) meeting. My question is: why does this not apply to Town Council? We elect six council members with the reasonable hope of some diversity of opinion and to broaden the knowledge base as it applies to decision making. This diversity could lead to open and earnest public discussion of issues before the outcome is determined. Instead we get invited to a “public hearing” in which we are allowed to vent for three minutes on an issue in which the outcome has been predetermined. And, by the way, don’t ask a question. Questions are not allowed. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. Remember this when you go to vote on May 6.
The title of this article is “Why Is Downtown Losing 160 Parking Spaces?”
How could the Town lose something it never had?
When Mr. Hand takes possession of the Belo and ropes off the parking lots then the merchants on Mason Avenue will feel the burn. When I go downtown I look for a parking space on Mason. If there are none I use the parking lots. If we can’t use those lots anymore and people have no place to park, they will leave town without shopping.
I know everyone says that the parking lots were never ours to use; however, the owner generously did allow the public to park there. We became accustomed to using the lots, and now they will be gone.
Maybe the town should have made contact with the owners instead of waiting for a developer to grab them up.
I agree with Nancy. The 160 parking places did not belong to the town in the first place so how is it that we are losing them?
“How could the town lose what it never had?” Ask the grandparents who now might have to walk from Rayfield’s in the rain to see their kids in a play at Arts Enter. We have had the USE of those 160 parking spaces for years, with the permission of the owner.
Nancy is 100% right on the money. What has happened to this country? It is private property and the owner can do what he wants with it. Maybe the town needs to raise taxes so they can put in a bus system so that grandmother doesn’t have to walk in the rain…Again, what has happened to this country? Everybody wants something for nothing.