Large-scale development is not the answer for the HRA property

On August 12 and 26, the five-member Hull Redevelopment Authority will start to

discuss whether the HRA land will be sold to private developers for condos and apartments. It’s crucial for us to voice our preference for sustainable development and maintenance of open space for the community. With Hull at a crossroads, this is the moment to insist the HRA accept the genuine will of the people and make responsible decisions to safeguard the values of our community and protect our environment for future generations. Arguments against large-scale development on the HRA land: Sea level rise and flood risk.

For 50 years, Hull ranked #1 out of. Massachusetts towns for claims paid per household under the National Flood Insurance Program. It was never a good idea to build homes and critical infrastructure in a flood zone because inevitably, homeowners and taxpayers bear the cost of expensive mitigation. Now that we understand sea level rise poses a threat of chronic inundation, new large-scale development should not be built on land susceptible to flooding.

Coastal wetlands protection. Permanent structures would exacerbate erosion on this narrow barrier beach within a VE Velocity Hazard Zone and Coastal AO Flood Zone. Massachusetts state building code requires that structures in these zones be built on open pilings.

Safety concerns. Housing in VE and AO zones introduces severe risks to the safety of

residents, particularly vulnerable populations like seniors. Only two roads allow for emergency evacuation from our narrow peninsula, and both are susceptible to storm-surge flooding in low-lying areas.

Impact on infrastructure. Hull is already one of the most densely populated small towns in Massachusetts. New large-scale residential development would add to existing traffic and parking problems, and further stress our aging water, sewer, and electricity infrastructure.

Small, beach-town character. Large beachfront residential development would ruin Hull’s small-town beach community character and restrict the community’s and visitors’ access to the public beach. And luxury condos and apartments don’t align with our community’s needs. The proposed two-way road plan in the HRA Draft Urban Renewal Plan is designed to facilitate large-scale private development, but it would prevent the boardwalk and bike path promised in the DCR Nantasket Beach Master Plan.

The HRA land isn’t blighted. According to Massachusetts General Laws, the HRA land doesn’t qualify for “urban renewal” because it isn’t a “blighted open area” or “detrimental to safety, health, morals, welfare.” Generating maximum tax revenue from large-scale development is not the objective of renewal projects, and improving the land as a beautiful public park is not financially unfeasible.

Preserve a valuable natural asset. From one spectacular spot, we can watch the sunrise over the ocean and the sunset over World’s End. This natural asset should be preserved for the public in perpetuity – not sold and developed as private property for the exclusive use of a privileged group.

Economic benefits of public open space: Well-designed, managed, and maintained open spaces for recreation and amusements attract residents and tourists and can generate substantial revenue for our local economy.

Opposition to overdevelopment. Proposals for high-density residential development have always encountered strong resistance from Hull residents. Recent surveys and feedback sessions underscore the strong preference for public open space and opposition to large residential and commercial buildings on the HRA land.

Lisa French