Joe Nastri is a long-time Eastwood businessman who was involved in the original Eastwood Review Board that was disbanded by the City.
I too hope that the city does the right thing and upholds the zoning Overlay standards. Assertions have been made time and again that Eastwood looks the way it does because of neighbors and or the Zoning Overlay Guidelines. This is false. The reason why Eastwood has some problems with appearance is firstly because property owners, such as the owner of the old Steak and Sundae building and Byrne Dairy properties have made a conscious decision to allow these properties to fall into disrepair. The plan is for neighbors to get so fed up that we will accept what ever they decide is appropriate.
Furthermore, Eastwood has been allowed (as elsewhere in the city) to develop as any property owner sees fit because of a lack of design standards. The first exception to that previous statement is Walgreens and Pompco. Wow, the best looking properties on James Street. The only two that have complied with zoning overlay district standards and guidelines. It shows you what can be done when property owners and developers choose to do the right things and comply with certain standards.
It is for the betterment of Eastwood and the hope that the business district will look good in the future that I ask the city planners to please uphold the standards and guideline that were passed into law. One of the standards states that no free standing signs will be allowed. Remember if we make this exception we will have to continue to make exceptions. Walgreens did a nice job with their building. Across the street is a nice pocket park with a monument to soldiers. Let’s not muck it up with a digital signage announcing a sale on toilet paper.
Did they not end up voting at the April 6 meeting? There’s been not a word about the meeting outcome that I can find.
Aaron, I’m trying to see if there’s a way to get a full transcript of the meeting. To sum up, though, about two people were in favor of the sign (one of them was Minch Lewis, who has been pro-Walgreens all along) and probably about fifteen people who were against it and also read their statements into the record.
But Guy Hart, the developer, did not show up. Some folks expressed disgust with this. He did, however, have a meeting at about noon about which just about nobody in Eastwood knew anything. He has more proposals, but they all include some sort of in-ground monument sign, which violates the guidelines.
The most important thing people need to remember is that each waiver that is allowed is one more signal to future developers that they can put us through all that Guy Hart has put us through. That they can play the game, wear down the residents, and pretend to compromise when what they’re really doing, as was pointed out in the meeting, is playing a game at which they are very adept. Ask for too much, then when there’s a “compromise,” you get what you wanted in the first place.