A revised plan for the Rivian electric vehicle company to store new vehicles at 305 Eastern Ave. gained the support of the Planning Board at its meeting last week.
The Planning Board had concerns with an earlier proposal that would have included a small park and fly operation on the property.
Board members were also concerned about tying up a potentially valuable piece of developable land in the city long-term with what is essentially a parking lot. The proposal before the city now calls for parking 142 electric vehicles on the site, maintaining 45 parking spots for the existing building on the property, and limiting approval for the project to five years.
The building is currently occupied by Glyptal Paint. Anthony Rossi, the attorney for the applicant, said it is expected that Glyptal will vacate the building next year, and Rivian will likely use a small portion of it.
“Rivian is only going to take a portion of the building, but they are going to redo the whole building, the exterior, the windows,” said Rossi.
The remainder of the building could be opened for future development, Rossi said. In addition, there will also be a new green space on the property which could add to the ability to develop the site in the future.
City Land Use and Planning Director John DePriest said that the parcel is an airport-related overlay district, and the zoning does allow for the storage and repair of vehicles in that district.
Planning Board member Mimi Rancatore cast a dissenting vote against recommending approval of the project, noting that the green space is not in an area that can be accessed by anyone in the area.
“You are building something that doesn’t benefit the city in any way, shape, or form,” said Rancatore. “I still think that there are a lot of ifs in this project.”
Rossi stated that the project will bring in tax dollars and acquisition fees to the city coffers.
“The money that is going to be put in is pretty extensive,” said Rossi.
Rancatore said she couldn’t approve a project that was locking up a valuable piece of property for five years for use as a giant parking lot.
Planning Board member Eric Czernizer asked what the alternative was for the property, since it was in an industrial area and can’t be used for affordable housing or other needed uses in the city.
DePriest agreed that there wasn’t much of an alternative for the site, and that the proposal would improve the property over its current state.