Jump to content

DEAD: Belmonte Castello (Knight Street)

Cotuit

By Cotuit
in Providence Projects and Construction

Recommended Posts

oak Unincorporated Area

oak

Posted
Posted
so, they are asking for the very same thing they were denied before? Yes, because the appeal of the denial was going to be remanded back from Superior Court to the ZBR.

And they already have the height var. because the policy (now clear) was unclear? Yes, the applicant was able to keep the height variance even though it should have expired because the policy wasn't clear.

Since when is a demo permit the same as a building permit? They aren't the same. But, the applicant was told by a City employee that the demo permit could be substituted for a building permit and this action would keep the height variance that should have expired in absence of a building permit being pulled in effect.

Is the building just as ugly? Can't comment.

has anything changed at all? I haven't seen any drawings. If the case had been remanded to the ZBR and the membership hadn't changed, the case wouldn't be de novo and the original application would be back before the ZBR with no changes. Since the case has to be heard de novo before the new board, they might be allowed to change it. This is an unusual circumstance. I'm not sure if the ordinance requires the original application to be heard or if the applicant may modify it. The applicant couldn't ask for more without a new application, but they might be able to ask for less or to modify the appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply
glassandsteel Whistle-Stop

glassandsteel

Posted
Posted

Although it seems there are some very troubling aspects to the process of this building coming to be a reality, I would still love to see it happen. This parcel is in sight from five of the windows of my apartment and I would love to have it accompany the church in my view. Despite my wishes though, this is definitely starting to worry me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveRPI Whistle-Stop

DaveRPI

Posted
Posted

question about ht. variances

what if 2 bldgs were proposed for a site of private property

one a mid-rise modest bldg that includes a place for some group of people to meet regularly w/ little to no surface parking

and the other...

the exact same bldg and grounds of st marks basilica in venice but it has a large surface lot behind the building to accomodate tourists

both projects would be above the ht variance

and the ugly one was proposed 1st and denied b/c of the ht, the group decides to go and build it in hartford

months later the second is now proposed by a different group, would it pass?

be honest and admit that it would b/c there is no consistency in zoning laws for ht and similar things

people would look past the ht and be happy they had a what is in some people's eye a world reknowned architectural gem in their neighborhood

height shouldnt delve into validty of private property development

overt or subconsciously

and i just threw the parking points in just to see what that would add to the argument

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jencoleslaw Town

jencoleslaw

Posted
Posted

i have no idea what you're asking--its like wacko language or something, but zoning isn't as vague as "design standards" and variances should be an exception not the rule. Yes, the different makeup of the board plays a role in what things end up passing and what things don't, and frankly i think that has more to do with corruption or an inability to actually do the job than anything else, because a good board follows the rules set out before them and applies the same standards (ie., zoning) to a piece of land no matter where it is or what it looks like (which is why the trigger for a project to go before CPC or some other designy body should be lower than 40K sq ft footprint). How easily the board is swayed by abutters is another matter all together because when abutters sue, it costs the city money.

That's also why we tighten up loose and slack zoning laws--so that crappy buildings like this one don't even have a chance and hopefully FIRST end up with good design that adds to the community, rather than having to pull a decent design out of a developer like wisdom (no pun intended) teeth over the course of two years.

oh, and paying too much for a property does not constitute a financial hardship when you're asking for variances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
basachs Burg

basachs

Posted
Posted

Figure I would knock the dust off this one...

So last weekend they knocked down the two houses behind the lot for this proposed development, cleared the lot and took down all the fencing...no idea what the plan is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quente Whistle-Stop

quente

Posted
Posted
Figure I would knock the dust off this one...

So last weekend they knocked down the two houses behind the lot for this proposed development, cleared the lot and took down all the fencing...no idea what the plan is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.