Letter: Bristol coverage does not reflect community feelings

Posted 3/15/18

I do not believe the March 8 edition of the Bristol Phoenix presents a balanced view of the discussion of the proposed Roiter development on Thames Street. Half of the front page above the fold is …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Register to post events


If you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here.

Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content.

Day pass subscribers

Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.


Letter: Bristol coverage does not reflect community feelings

Posted

I do not believe the March 8 edition of the Bristol Phoenix presents a balanced view of the discussion of the proposed Roiter development on Thames Street. Half of the front page above the fold is dedicated to the developer’s explanation as to why his plan is good for Bristol. The Phoenix also allows Mr. Roiter another half-page (p. 5) to state his counter arguments to those who object to the project.

In the same edition, the entire Opinion page (p. 6) is dedicated to the same subject, including a mostly favorable editorial and a 17-paragraph letter to the editor in favor of the project.

As an attendee of the Thursday, March 1, Bristol Historic District Commission (HDC) meeting many residents — including those who have invested in neighboring properties — raised valid concerns about the proposed project. I see little coverage in the Phoenix about the full range and weight of concerns expressed during the public hearing.

Those concerns were enough to temporarily derail or delay what appeared to be the likely approval of the project by the HDC. The initial straw poll was 2 “for” the project, 2 “against,” 1 abstention, and the chairperson, Oryann Lima, being the fifth deciding vote favoring approval of some aspects of the project, while indicating a concern for one section of the design (having no issues with the height of the development itself).

In the end, the HDC voted for a continuance for a joint hearing with the Bristol Planning Board the following week, as suggested by the town’s legal counsel. This would be the first joint meeting of its kind with the planning board.

As a resident of Bristol and a historic district homeowner who has appeared before the HDC numerous times, I was dismayed at the tenor of the meeting. To my knowledge this was the first public hearing on this iteration of the project. Listening to commissioner and developer comments at the meeting, you would have thought this was the 10th public hearing on the proposal and not the first.

The HDC appeared to have a definite sense of urgency around approving the project or otherwise moving the project forward — the likes of which I have not seen in 17 years. I understand the history of the property and that the HDC has had the opportunity to give the developer feedback in other meetings, but the project hadn’t seen the light of day as far as the public is concerned.

I found the March 8 coverage in the Phoenix quite troubling in light of the circumstances. Many homeowners and commercial property owners have invested significantly in maintaining and restoring properties in and around the historic district. These investments and the historic integrity of the district should not be considered subordinate to the economic interests of Mr. Roiter (including the $2 million in potential state tax credits for this project), nor should the concerned voices of residents and taxpayers be subordinate to that of the developer, the HDC and the Bristol Phoenix.

According to the Preservation Alliance, “Achieving good design in an historic context is often the result of a process more than explicit guidelines, a process that includes a dialogue between community and preservation interests ...”

Given the precedent-setting nature and scale of the development and the amount of influence being exerted over the process, we should all be concerned. It is critical that all voices and points of view are heard and considered in this process and not truncated, silenced or dismissed because of an artificial timeline, hidden agenda, or simply because they are inconvenient truths.

Go to the meetings, take your rightful place in the process, listen, be heard and be a part of this important community conversation.

Nancy Chace

21 Constitution St.

Bristol

2024 by East Bay Media Group

Barrington · Bristol · East Providence · Little Compton · Portsmouth · Tiverton · Warren · Westport
Meet our staff
MIKE REGO

Mike Rego has worked at East Bay Newspapers since 2001, helping the company launch The Westport Shorelines. He soon after became a Sports Editor, spending the next 10-plus years in that role before taking over as editor of The East Providence Post in February of 2012. To contact Mike about The Post or to submit information, suggest story ideas or photo opportunities, etc. in East Providence, email mrego@eastbaymediagroup.com.