Traverse City Record-Eagle

Our Views

EDITORIAL

The issue: CVS rezoning plan

Our view: Time to negotiate

January 13, 2012

Commission must balance pluses, minuses of CVS pharmacy

----

Traverse City has waited a long time for the intersection of Front and Division streets to come back to life; now, a CVS pharmacy has been proposed for the blighted northeast corner. But is its suburban-style design really what we want at one of the city's main gateways?

Two of the four corners there have been revitalized in recent years by businesses that fit the space, fit the neighborhood and fit the city's long-term zoning goals of businesses that are pedestrian-friendly, aesthetically pleasing -- or at least not garishly inconsistent with the rest of the city -- and "(m)aintain or enhance the character of downtown," according to zoning documents.

The CVS building, however, looks exactly like every other CVS store ever built and is massive for the site; existing zoning would limit a pharmacy there to 12,000 square feet of gross floor area based on two or more floors, which means the 13,500-square-foot CVS single-story proposal is more than twice that size. The store will include a drive-though prescription pickup.

The CVS plan also exceeds current parking requirements and doesn't conform to the master plan in regard to parking or sidewalks. And the planning commission has not even addressed how a high-volume store there would impact future restructuring of that troubled intersection.

A planning commission document says "(T)he large parking lot is contrary to the long-term vision for this area to have a downtown character ..." but says that could change "if public parking and improved public transit service is available" in the future.

What, a parking deck? A bus every two minutes? Neither is likely to ever happen, making that concession a stretch, at best.

In fact, the entire planning commission document is more a long apology for the plan than an analysis that could offer options and alternatives.

Nowhere is the cookie-cutter exterior design addressed. In terms of hours and high traffic volume, city planners only say hours won't exceed other businesses in the neighborhood and traffic is "considerably lower than a number of uses that are currently permitted ..."

Give us a for-instance. Give us an opinion on whether that volume is good or bad for a crowded intersection. Give us an analysis, for heaven's sake.

Planners deal only fleetingly with a key issue for any building there -- removing stormwater from the long-polluted site. The planning commission says stormwater will have to be collected and "filtered for grit, oils, and then released." That likely means a pump of some kind on the site and that could mean noise.

Lastly, vehicle traffic must be addressed. The city really has to rethink the idea of allowing cars exiting the drive-through to cross three lanes of traffic to turn south onto Division.

There is simply no argument that Front and Division needs help, and a business like CVS would offer jobs, tax base and plenty of retail opportunities for neighbors. To challenge the planning commission's 6-1 approval of the rezoning would seem crazy.

But there are bigger issues here -- the exterior design and size of the building, the outsized parking lot, the non-conforming brick-and-ironwork walls along the sidewalks, the traffic, the stormwater, the lights in the parking lot, the potentially long hours, the precedent that could be set and the future redesign of the intersection.

Despite the need for a rebirth at that corner, the city needn't just accept what CVS is offering. This is the time to negotiate for an exterior design that fits, a sidewalk and parking lot design that fits, more than just assurances on handling stormwater, a real traffic analysis.

CVS wants to do business here, and the city wants a high-end tenant. But city leaders have an obligation to put long-term city interests first and to defend the zoning ordinance, which is there for a reason.

CVS would be a shot in the arm for an area that needs one, but not at any cost.

Editor's note: The city commission is scheduled to present the proposed rezoning Tuesday, and could schedule a public hearing on the issue.

Text Only