The Kinzies filed a competing proposal, the first one in the 36-year history of the state’s DPA regulations, that called for a boatyard on the site.
The Department of Environmental Protection, which has permitting jurisdiction over the land, went back and forth on the competing proposal before finally rejecting it. That decision sparked the Kinzies’ legal challenge, which ultimately paid off in the Appeals Court ruling that the DEP failed to properly consider the competing proposal.
The court’s decision does not mean the city has to accept the Kinzies’ boatyard proposal, but it does mean the restaurant plan cannot go forward.
Kinzie said the city should have revised the port area rules long ago. He said lifting the regulations will allow for the type of mixed-use development, including stores and restaurants, that residents want on the waterfront.
Kinzie floated a plan 10 years ago to put shops and restaurants on his Port Marina property and said he would revisit those ideas if the waterfront regulations are changed.
Kinzie often fought with the Scanlon administration over the restaurant project and issues such as public access on the waterfront and the location of boat slips. Kinzie supported Cahill, who has been open to revising the port area designation, in last year’s election.
“I’m optimistic,” Kinzie said, “that with a new administration and a new City Council, it’s going to be an era of forward progress on the waterfront, rather than continued battling.”
Staff writer Paul Leighton can be reached at 978-338-2675 or firstname.lastname@example.org.