I have to ask because to me it appears to me it has to be one or the other.
I posted the Letter to the Editor from the President of Lowell Youth Soccer and let me be clear here. I thing Rodney Elliot is speaking from the viewpoint of the President of LYS. The fact he is also a City Councilor is secondary and NOT the issue. I may not agree with a lot of things that Councilor Elliot has said or done but in this particular issue I again agree with him 100%.
I also thing that Rodney Elliot the father / active neighborhood Sports Youth President is trying very hard to NOT approach this from a City Councilor stance.. To those like the Blowellian who even is implying a conflict I think in this case Rodney is trying very hard to make sure he ISN”T in conflict.
Yes if you are opposed to Rodney or are a supporter of the Manager you could stretch the point that as a councilor he may be putting himself in a situation that the ethic commission would say he is in conflict. In this case and as a parent who spent many days at the ball field or stadium I see him as carrying out the work of a Youth Sports President. A volunteer position that is assisting city youth and parents of city youth.
In his letter Rodney IN NO WAY Implied what I am about to Imply, so please let’s be clear this is MY VIEW from the cheap seats.
This appears to be either a case of incompetence on the part of Development Service’s or political payback by the Administration for the way the councilor has treated them.
We have been told many times and I have posted on several occasions that under the “New” Dept. of Development Services permitting , development and inspectional issues have improved and that the pape trail which under Building Inspector Camacho was said to be out of control was all corrected and this Dept. is running smoothly.
Then explain how such a high impact. controversial project like the Walgreens development can have a paper trail that shows at every public hearing and meeting on the project, the issue of extending a sewer line a short distance to the city’s six-acre soccer field to provide sewer service to the four bathrooms was always discussed and this condition was recommended by both the City Engineer and Wastewater as an infrastructure improvement that should be completed fails to not only get done but the explanation given is a paperwork issue seemed to have slipped through the cracks and a “formal comment” requesting the sewer-line extension was not submitted by the City, to the developer.
I thought issues like this were NOT occurring under this watch? it calls into question the competence level of whoever is directly responsible to Manager and supervise the person responsible for this.
It also raises the question not to just supporters of Rodney Elliot (Something no one can accuse me of) but to the “average” citizen who pays attention to local politics if this was done purposely as political payback by this Administration against their biggest and loudest critic.
It will be explained away as a simple mistake but it does leave a very wide open issue for people to discuss.
I don’t recall Councilor Elliot bringing this issue to the council floor and because he is the President of the League I believe he has tried to keep the two positions separate.
I would hope that Councilor Lorrey who has been a strong supporter of Recreation in the City or Councilor Kennedy who is a fair and even kneeled councilor will not only file a motion to ask how this occurred but ask the Manager and his administration what they are going to do to correct it.
Unfortunately the Council has another week “off” from their regular meeting and have another “Special” Meeting dealing with the Auditor’s dept. this week so it will have to wait until a May meeting to be dealt with but answers and resolutions should be publicly addressed.
I stopped by the fields at 9:30 this morning after Saturday Morning Live to see for myself how busy these fields are and the place was packed. The LYS built the bathrooms using their own funds and were promised by the city that they would be tied into the city lines.
The City should HONOR their word!
You’re in the ball park, Gerry.
This come as no surprise to anyone involved with LYSA. The President & Vice President gave them the heads up on March 14th:
(via email)
> Walgreens Construction – by now many you have probably seen the demolition of homes on Edwards Street in preparation of the construction on the new Walgreens Store. We will always have complete access and Edwards Street will not close until new street will be complete. Parking will be affected a little as the city allowed a trailer to be place on city land. I already spoke to the developer about this in an attempt to be moved as no one ever agreed to this.
Also, Walgreen’s and the City reneged on its commitment to hook-up the bathrooms in the Concession Stand – the only request that LYSA asked for. I have met with the developer and he told me that extending the sewer line to the septic tank was a ‘wish list’ item and because they exceeded their budget, they wouldn’t do this.
I will criticize C. Elliott’s lack of tact. I’d like to agree with Gerry and dismiss the fact that Elliott is more than a, justifiably, pissed off parent. He is a Councilor. Thus, imo, constrained by a manifest of decorum that each of our City elders are yoked to. They have to be better and should lead by example. Inflammatory language fired for effect is lazy and vulgar.
Further, in the latest LYSA letter, Elliott penned: “We seem to have continual “paperwork” and “permit” issues in this city.” This line is gratuitous It is a blatant dig at the CM and the staff, even alluding to the LHA brouhaha.
That said, the City seems to have screwed the pooch on this one.
I take caution when all we know about something comes from only “one side” of the conflict. But, Gerry makes a very plausible argument that the City’s “professionals” were, either, asleep at the wheel or, worse, negatively impacted the youth soccer community by playing petty politics with an “adversary.”
Something is rotten in Denmark. This is, as Gerry pointed out, a very high profile project. There are many issues related to abutters and traffic flow. I’ve been involved in a number of mid scale commercial construction projects. These sorts of ‘side jobs’ haunt the construction managers and superintendent. It’s a contingency that they know they may or may not have to accommodate in their work schedule, so it sticks in their craw.They know when they will have the site contractor doing a related task and when that side job will, if greenlighted, fit best into their “means and methods.” Forgotten? Hardly.
Badly played by all the big boys and girls. Too late for a Mulligan?
In reviewing the minutes of the Planning Board, I was unable to find any testimony or conditions on extending the sewer connection to the soccer field. However, at the May 16, 2011 meeting there was discussion on drainage from the soccer field.
“Rodney Elliot 15 Cresta Dr. – speaking on behalf of the soccer league – any time there is
a season, it currently draws up to 900 kids – it’s a 3 month season twice a year with
about 10 games a day on the weekends. Concerned with parking – have had trouble
with parking since day one. It’s a very nice field but parking is a challenge – have tried
to work with neighborhood businesses and it was going well, but have had trouble since
temple has gone in and with recent business owners as well. Also concerned about the
lot that the City expanded to be used for stormwater, particularly in terms of drainage.
Currently no drainage from the City property – only flooded twice during the two major
floods that occurred. Also concerned about traffic, including the addition of 150 cars
during the games peak times. Looking to continue to grow the league, run games from
8am to 4pm. Thinks the league is good for the City, the field has a lot of use.
Appreciates efforts of the developer, but foresees problems going over the Rourke
Bridge. Concerned about cut-through traffic as well.”
With all the issues with CSO (combined sewer overflow) could this be a case of miscommunication between drainage and sewer lines?
To add to the point about the difference between drainage and sewer lines there should be a few questions asked. Inasmuch as Coffman was making significant changes to the area, it is wise to make sure they maintain or improve the drainage. That should be done, and if Coffman is not doing it then the City should enforce it. However, a sewer line from the soccer field does not seem to be a requirement for Coffman, although they could have offered it as a good-will gesture. But if they don’t offer it, it doesn’t seem like the City is in a position to require it.
So that leads to a few questions:
1) Was the original soccer septic system sufficient, and if not why was it approved?
2) Has the work that Coffman undertaken affected the ability of the septic system?
3) Has Coffman done the work to enhance the drainage as was requested by the PB?
4) If the soccer league intended for the City to install the sewer line, was that requested of the City Manager by vote of the city council?
If Coffmans’ work has caused the problem, they should fix it, maybe with both drainage and sewerage.
If it is separate from the work done by Coffman, it seems like the city council should investigate two items: 1) how was the original system approved, and 2) request the manager to look into installing a sewer line while the activity is still in process. (Of course that may be controversial due to the prior request to hold the tax increase to zero.)
Gerry – I totally agree with you. My own opinion is that it is both incompetance on the part of the Developmental Services , compounded by Coffman trying to avoid doing what they promised and a touch political payback. I am a resident of the Midddlesex Village area. I attended several of the meetings that preceeded the approval of this project. We were told that Edwaards St would NOT be moved opposite Cornell St. ( It will be) . That the soccer fields would not affected and later we were told that the lines would be extended. They also said they would do traffic improvement to the entrance to the Rourke Bridge extending the right hand lane to alleviate traffic. It doesn’t look like that is going to happen either. The LYS has done more than it’s share, it’s time for the Manager to make sure something is done to fix the problem. Perhaps the Council needs to be reminded that there are thousands of kids in the soccer program and that those kids have parents that vote.