Editorial: Why Barrington voters should reject the monastery development plan

Posted 5/15/24

In the three years since the Town of Barrington purchased a seven-acre property on Watson Avenue, its plans have ebbed and flowed considerably, as have public opinions. Some want the land surrounding …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Register to post events


If you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here.

Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content.

Day pass subscribers

Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.


Editorial: Why Barrington voters should reject the monastery development plan

Posted

In the three years since the Town of Barrington purchased a seven-acre property on Watson Avenue, its plans have ebbed and flowed considerably, as have public opinions. Some want the land surrounding the former Carmelite Monastery preserved as open space. Others are driven to create as much affordable housing as possible.

The town’s actual plans initially favored the latter, with early sketches depicting more than 50 housing units crammed amid a quiet neighborhood of attractive, single-family homes. To its credit, the town has scaled back its plans to something more modest, a significant improvement over absurdly dense plans of 50-plus homes.

Now before Barrington Financial Town Meeting voters is a plan to sell off much of the land to create six, single-family house lots, and to gift another section of the property to a private developer to build 12 age-restricted “cottages” in a tight (they called it “cluster”) neighborhood. Residents would be ages 55-plus, and five of the 12 units would meet the legal definition as “affordable.”

From the surprising moment when the $3.5 million purchase of the monastery property was approved three years ago by just a single vote, until now, we have not changed our perspective on what should happen with that land. At the very best, the town could tear down the old monastery and create a gorgeous stretch for open space in a lovely area of town. At the very worst, it could revitalize that building to create senior housing, make modest improvements to its surroundings, and preserve as much of the open space as possible.

That is what municipalities typically do when they take possession of land. They preserve it in its current state. Or they use it for municipal services, like a school or a ball field. Rarely do they play the role of private developer, creating more demand for public services — especially not when they have the highest residential tax burden in all of Rhode Island.

If they do not like this plan, Town Meeting voters can simply reject it. They still have the power to decide what happens here.

2024 by East Bay Media Group

Barrington · Bristol · East Providence · Little Compton · Portsmouth · Tiverton · Warren · Westport
Meet our staff
Jim McGaw

A lifelong Portsmouth resident, Jim graduated from Portsmouth High School in 1982 and earned a journalism degree from the University of Rhode Island in 1986. He's worked two different stints at East Bay Newspapers, for a total of 18 years with the company so far. When not running all over town bringing you the news from Portsmouth, Jim listens to lots and lots and lots of music, watches obscure silent films from the '20s and usually has three books going at once. He also loves to cook crazy New Orleans dishes for his wife of 25 years, Michelle, and their two sons, Jake and Max.