A proposal to build a luxury hotel condominium at Diamond Cove has raised concern among some Great Diamond Islanders who say the development would tax the islands’ already strained resources and diminish residents’ quality of life.
The proposed Inn at Diamond Cove would be built at Fort Mckinley’s Double Barracks and Hospital buildings, a property currently owned by the city. The project’s first phase would include the construction of 20 condominiums at the Double Barracks, as well as a swimming pool and dining area. During its second phase, the inn’s developers would build 14 more units at the Hospital site.
The inn’s developers, The Inn at Diamond Cove, LLC, which includes David Bateman, one of Diamond Cove’s original developers, cleared a major hurdle in late June when Portland’s Planning Board recommended that the City Council amend the site’s zoning, which currently permits hotels but not hotel condominiums, in order to allow the project to go forward. The council will vote on the zoning change at the end of the month, after a public hearing tentatively scheduled for Aug. 18.
The public hearing will likely be well attended by island residents looking to express their concerns about the development. They worry that the hotel will increase island traffic, create more congestion on the already overused state pier, overwhelm existing solid and wastewater disposal systems, and draw too many short-term visitors who will change the community’s character. They also question whether the inn would bring more guests than its plans currently state and whether the city of Portland has a conflict of interest in the matter.
Diamond Cove resident Faith Boudreau points out that the proposed Inn at Diamond Cove isn’t an inn in the usual sense of the word. “These are condominiums that will be owned by investors and rented out by hotel management. This not a little mom and pop kind of inn,” she said.
The inn is a cross between a between a traditional condo and a hotel, called a residential hotel condominium. Like many condominiums, the inn’s units will be owned by investors, who may or may not live there, and have kitchens and at least one bedroom. But the inn will function as a hotel and be managed by the company that runs the mainland Portland Harbor Hotel, Buffalo-based Hart Hotels, which will handle all rentals.
Though developers plan to build only 20 condos during the project’s first phase, residents say the actual number of rentals would be much greater because most of the condos can be broken into smaller units by locking the doors that adjoin the rooms. These so-called “lockouts” can be rented individually, so the inn, as currently proposed, could actually rent 36 units on any given night during its first phase, says Bateman, adding that the hotel condominium could accommodate an “average figure” of 72 people.
More units mean more hotel guests, and Boudreau worries that the inn, which abuts the residential community on a piece of land called the Parade Grounds, will bring an influx of outsiders and ruin Diamond Cove’s family-friendly feel. The area is home to families with children and Boudreau says life in the close-knit community is reminiscent of the 1940s, and 50s when kids played freely and parents didn’t need to worry about traffic or strangers. “I feel it is going to change the fabric of the community here,” she says.
Boudreau also points to a conflict of interest on the part of the City of Portland, whose city councilors will ultimately decide the fate of the project. The city has owned the Double Barracks and Hospital sites since 2004 when it foreclosed on the property because its owner, Fort McKinley Associates, was not paying its taxes.
City Planner Rick Nolan says the city has been unable to sell the property because the buildings are in disrepair and, as historic sites, must be developed accordingly. If the Inn at Diamond Cove proposal is approved, the city will sell the land to developer David Bateman for $1. Bateman declined to say how much he anticipates the renovation will cost.
Nolan says the planning board acted independently of the city when it recommended the zoning changes. “No one has told me, ‘you have to approve this because the city needs to sell this property,'” he said.
But Boudreau points out that the project might never have gotten this far if the City of Portland, (whose Downtown Portland Corporation named Bateman Economic Developer of the Year in 2002) didn’t own the property. The Diamond Cove Homeowners Association (DCHA), comprised of all property owners at Diamond Cove, including the City of Portland approved the proposal for the inn last year by a two-thirds majority. The city cast its 23 votes in favor of the development, which will take a dilapidated property off its hands. Without those votes, Boudreau says it is unlikely that the development would have been approved.
On the other side of the island, members of the traditional cottage community are wary of the new development because they say Diamond Cove is already failing to uphold agreements it made with the cottage community upon its creation in the 1980s, and the hotel condominium will only make matters worse.
When Diamond Cove was proposed in the 1980s, it sparked a bitter debate that lasted for years. Eventually, a coalition of organizations including Friends of Casco Bay, Maine Audubon, and The Island Institute (which publishes this newspaper) intervened and developers and the coalition members signed a covenant outlining land use provisions. Officials from Friends of Casco Bay and The Island Institute have written letters to the Portland Planning Board expressing their concerns about the proposed inn.
One result of these negotiations was an agreement on the part of Diamond Cove to build a private pier that it would use for passengers and goods to avoid crowding the public pier in the cottage community, which is accessible only by a narrow dirt road on a small isthmus.
But Judy Savastano, who has summered on the island for 30 years and plans to retire there this fall, says many Diamond Cove residents and staff use the public dock to shave time from their commute to the mainland because the ferry stops at the public dock, then heads to Long Island before stopping at Diamond Cove.
Some Diamond Cove and cottage community residents are lobbying the ferry line to change the route, but meanwhile Savastano says Diamond Cove sends shuttle buses to cart Diamond Cove Residents home as well as a truck to pick up supplies nearly every time the ferry arrives. The result, she said, is major congestion.
Savastano is quick to point out that this is not a feud between newcomers and longer-term residents, saying, “This is not an issue of wanting to separate people. We are one island.” But on an island as small as Great Diamond, agreements like this one need to be enforced. Savastano says she is in favor of the inn, but wants to see language inserted into the proposal that specifically states that its management will use Diamond Cove’s own dock for all service vehicles, guests, linens and other supplies. The Diamond Island Association, an organization of cottage community residents founded in 1882, has not taken a position favoring or opposing the inn. But it has a clear position on the issue of traffic, says its secretary, Nancy Gleason, “The one concern is that we do not want any more traffic. We do not want the traffic from the hotel to further impact the cottage community,” she said.
In July, the group’s attorney drafted language that would restrict the use of the public pier by the inn and presented it to the planning board. If that language does not appear as a restriction in the city planner’s report to City Council, Gleason says the group will oppose the project.
The group’s opposition could be a headache for the city. Portland’s Department of Public Works currently stores trucks and equipment on land it leases from Diamond Island Association. If the group’s concerns are not addressed, Gleason says the association may terminate the city’s lease.
For his part, Bateman, who was managing general partner of Diamond Cove until 1997, says he says he has a “great relationship” with the community and sympathizes with its concerns. “They may be people who have been disgruntled about management since I left in 1997, but that was not on my watch.”
Bateman, who owns a home at Diamond Cove, says the inn’s management will do all it can to make sure hotel guests get on the right boat by having check-in times that correspond with the ferry’s arrival at Diamond Cove by ensuring that guests’ luggage is only dropped off at the Diamond Cove pier. Still, he says they can only do so much to make sure that hotel guests don’t use the public pier, and bristled at the suggestion on the part of some cottage community residents that the hotel be fined for errant hotel guests. “This is getting to the point of ridiculousness,” he says.
It remains to be seen if the plans for the inn will be approved, and whether residents’ concerns about the development are well-founded. Still, some Diamond Cove homeowners are making contingency plans in case their fears are confirmed and the inn ruins the quiet lifestyle they love.
Boudreau says some neighbors have already put their homes on the market because of concerns about the inn. While Boudreau herself isn’t rushing to sell, she says she is prepared to do so if the inn brings too much hustle and bustle. Fellow Diamond Cove resident Alden Finney, who bought her home because she says she wanted to live in “a quiet residential community” is thinking of the future, too. “We will wait and see how bad it is that first year. If there is constant noise and confusion we will put our house up for sale,” she says.