Sounds like a good idea and it would certainly help Attleboro with a face lift and it might bring in some wealthier/smarter people to get us off the list of Gateway Cities. Of course, if you were smart and rich, you wouldn't live on polluted land next to the T. What was there before that contaminated the ground so that kids can't even play in the dirt?

This developer is requesting special permits and variances in seven areas of Attleboro Zoning Bylaws. Total building height to be increased, reduced side yard setbacks, increased use of lot area, reduced number of parking spaces, reduced size of parking spaces and more. They also want to be able to have a loading zone within the traffic lane on the street. Zoning meeting is March 14 at 6:30 p.m.

Low income housing units right next to all day parking for commuters taking the train into work. The Mayor and the ARA think this is a good idea? Kind of seems like putting a fox den right in the hen house. Great planning folks. Make it a pure retail and restaurant complex to bring tax dollars and visitors to the city. Don't create more taxes by bring in more children to our school system.

The public can speak at these meetings either in support of or in opposition of or just in general. You can also write a letter to have your opinion taken into consideration whether or not to approve the request. I urge anyone with concerns to do so.

For the record, nobody spoke at the meeting last night who was not connected to the project.

It was not while I was there, but I did arrive 15 minutes late.

While at a Conservation Commission meeting (for a separate issue) I observed a discussion about this property and would like to clarify a couple of things from what I remember of that talk.

The ARA is putting a significant amount of money into cleaning the ground on this lot. According to Judy Robbins, there will be less pollution in this soil after this process than likely amounts in some residential yards in the City.

The first floor of this building will be retail/restaurant. The loading zone will be in the parking area under the building- not on the street. The apartments above will be one and two bedroom apartments. I don't know about the intended quality of the apartments, but the developer seemed very concerned with the "bottom line" of the project which leads me to believe they will have high rent demands.

From that discussion, it sounded like the building was maximizing the height limits for the city- but only because it did not make financial sense to make the investment without a certain number of apartments. I believe there was also talk about some boards in the city preferring the taller building in the downtown area, but I could be mistaken.

To an extent, there is little that can be done here. Obviously, we don't want the eye-sore of a lot that we have now. But the only way to get rid of it is to have someone build on it. For it to make financial sense for the person willing to buy it, this is what has to happen.

Mr. Geddes I will attempt to attach the legal notice that identifies exactly what Crugnale Properties LLC is requesting. It is specific that they want a loading zone in the traffic lane. Also, they are not maximizing the height limits - they are asking to exceed what is allowed by right.

I attached the legal notice to this article at Martha's request.

Jonathan and Martha,

Thank you for this- I stand corrected. The architectural rendering of the lot that I saw at the Conservation Commission meeting did not show any loading zones in the streets and the only discussion of loading zones I remember was in reference to those under the building. And I must have misunderstood the conversation about the height of the building.