ROCKPORT — Voting unanimously Tuesday evening, Nov. 29, the six members of the Rockport Zoning Board of Appeals upheld municipal approval of the Hope for the Future LLC plan to  convert former Route 1 medical and physician offices to 18 residential units.

Votes were taken during the second meeting convened by the ZBA to consider the appeal submitted by Anthony F. Muri, who owns property on Sea Light Lane, in Rockport, adjacent to the Hope for the Future project. Muri was joined in the appeal by multiple neighbors. They argued that Rockport’s Planning Board acted without regard for clear record facts when it approved the project’s site plan July 28.

But the Rockport ZBA disagreed, and at the Nov. 29 meeting, indicated that the Planning Board was clear and displayed no improper deferrals or shortcuts, “or things not tended to properly,” said ZBA member Terri Mackenzie.

The Planning Board did not improperly defer to the owner’s characterization of the proposed use, the ZBA said.

The ZBA also agreed that the Planning Board did not err in approving the project as multi-family and corporate space in Rockport’s 907 zone. 

Concerning safety and security, the ZBA determined said that those standards lie outside the boards’ purview because Rockport’s land use ordinances do not stipulate such governing language, other than requisite letters of assessment from fire and police chiefs.

Still, ZBA members did weigh in on their own interpretations of the project and its relation to safety concerns.

“There is a theme going through here that there’s going to be all these homeless people going around here threatening our neighbors,” said ZBA member Robert Hall. ”Well, this is not a homeless center. This is supported dwellings of working class people.”

Mackenzie said the appellants’ letters were improperly conflating homeless shelter with what the project is.

“It’s affordable housing,” she said. “Affordable housing is not the same as a homeless shelter.”

The ZBA did, however, cite the letters from the police and fire chiefs for its own findings of fact.

In the end, the ZBA tied together its various motions made on the appellants’ arguments with a final motion denying the appeal, overall.

Hall read a prepared motion that included determinations that the Rockport Planning Board did not abuse its discretion in granting site plan approval.

Reach Editorial Director Lynda Clancy at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657