With a laundry list of 11th-hour amendments, the Westbrook City Council gave preliminary approval Monday to a contract zone for Stroudwater Place, the proposal to build the state’s largest retail development.
The vote of unanimous support garnered a round of applause from the audience full of residents, many of whom have criticized the City Council for taking its time with the project – 1.6-million-square-foot, $300 million development proposed by Westbrook resident Jason Snyder in February.
However, the Council’s final vote, which is scheduled to take place within the next two weeks, could still be delayed if the city decides the amendments proposed at the meeting are substantial enough to hand the contract zone back to the Planning Board for more review.
Councilors also gave preliminary approval to changes to the city’s comprehensive plan, which are necessary for the zone change. That vote came quickly, with only one councilor, Drew Gattine, a consistent critic of the project, opposed.
Originally, the City Council was scheduled last week to take a first vote on the changes to the comprehensive plan and on the contract zone for the project. However, after a lengthy public hearing, councilors voted to table to the vote until Monday out of respect for Councilor Suzanne Joyce, who had broken her ankle and wasn’t able to attend the meeting.
Residents who filled the council chambers at the public hearing returned Monday for the vote – and to have their voices heard again. The meat of the debate among councilors and residents came after Joyce proposed amendments to the contract zone, which she and Council President Brendan Rielly negotiated with the developer just minutes before the meeting.
The amendments added requirements for the size of the development, a mix of uses, traffic studies, noise, access from Stroudwater Street, trail connections and open space, among others.
While the amendments addressed some concerns of those who previously opposed the project, they also made some supporters, namely Councilor Lyle Cramer, uneasy – not because of the nature of the amendments, but because of their timing and presentation.
After Joyce and Rielly read and reread a handwritten copy of the amendments, Cramer questioned how he was going be able to take a vote on something that took several minutes to read without the “chance to see, read or digest” the proposal. He said he was in a dilemma, because he wanted to move the project forward, but felt uncomfortable voting for amendments he didn’t fully understand. He called the process a “sad mark on the history of politics” in the city.
Rielly said he understood and shared Cramer’s frustration, but said it was only recently that the developer offered to sit down and talk about issues that “we had flagged for a long time.”
Joyce said she understood, too, and these were answers to questions she had “from get-go,” and took the opportunity to try to resolve them, partially because people have criticized the council for holding up the process of moving the project forward.
“I honestly thought I was helping by moving this process along,” she said.
Though the amendments were a step forward in the negotiations, Councilor Mike Foley questioned whether they were substantial enough to require another review by the Planning Board, City Solicitor Bill Dale said he thought it should be.
City Administrator Jerre Bryant said that though there were many changes, he believed they were minor enough for the Council to be able to move forward without another Planning Board review.
Gattine commended Rielly and Joyce for bringing the amendments to the Council that night.
“There was a real leadership void that needed to be filled,” he said. “I’m appreciative of the fact that the Council president and Councilor Joyce showed some leadership.”
That led into a string of public comment, where people echoed Gattine’s praise for Joyce and Rielly, and told Cramer they shared his frustrations. Some reiterated lingering concerns with the project and others pleaded to keep the process moving.
“You don’t want to see laws and sausage being made,” resident Andy Broaddus said about the difficulty of the process. “It’s not a pretty sight.”
Broaddus reminded councilors of some other big decisions that were made in the past, like urban renewal, that were not quickly forgotten.
“Residents have long memories,” he said, and by voting for the project, “you can be on the right side of history with this.”
Some residents, however, asked councilors to take their time with the new amendments.
“Sometimes there’s a difference between doing something right and doing something right now,” said Matt Randall, of Saco Street, whose grandfather, Lew Randall, owns the property next to the proposed project.
“This isn’t just a one-time deal. This is the future we’re talking about,” he said.
Lew Randall said he remembered when the Maine Mall was proposed and the pitch that no one in South Portland would ever pay taxes again because of the revenue it would bring.
“I think a lot of people are having dreams,” he said of the Westbrook proposal.
Councilor John O’Hara reminded his fellow councilors that they would have a chance to take a “second bite at the apple” when a final vote was scheduled, and they could decide to slow the process down then.
“Vote it up, vote it down, but let’s vote on it,” he said.
Despite the numerous changes, questions and concerns brought up at the meeting, the entire City Council voted in favor of the proposed amendments and of the contract zone as a whole. Dale said he would review the amendments and give a recommendation as to whether the Planning Board would have to review them, too, before the Council could take a final vote.
Snyder was clearly pleased with the vote.
“The Council did their due diligence. We had to concede on some things, but we understand it’s a negotiation,” he said after the meeting.
“I’m very happy for the community.”
Send questions/comments to the editors.
