Dear Sir,
I am writing in response to the Pulse Line entry of November 22, 2017 regarding the Planning Board decision not to site an eighty-dog commercial boarding kennel adjacent to a neighborhood off Southwick Rd.
Neither the city of Westfield or the Planning Board is anti-business. The Planning Board is charged with keeping a balance between fostering growth and maintaining the attractive family friendly character of our city. Westfield certainly welcomes that Commercial Kennel along with the jobs and tax revenue it brings. What it does not welcome is having it in a place that will result in a twenty-four-hour noise assault on nearby homes. There are plenty of potential open space or industrial sites in Westfield that are appropriate for that business.
The two no votes by members of the Planning Board were not made by “buffoons”. There are no buffoons on the Board. Those votes were made by members after two lengthy public meetings that carefully considered the proposed business plan, that included input from those both for and against it. The members casting the no votes realized that there was wisdom in the intent of the original city ordinance restricting citing commercial kennels to rural residential or industrial zones, despite a recent convoluted ruling by the city law department saying otherwise.
Regarding Mr. Levesque’s presentation on behalf of the proposed kennel, it was a mixture of facts as well as suppositions and assumptions based on his opinions and his amateur noise level recordings of dubious relevance. There was no complete building plan created and signed by an architect experienced in commercial kennel design guaranteeing that the noise level outside the buildings would be within not only the prescribed legal limits, but at a level low enough so as not to interfere with the right of neighboring residents to enjoy their property in peace and quiet, Mr. Levesque’s figurative pat on the back and his assurances that “everything will be alright” notwithstanding. Well, that presentation was not nearly specific enough and did not persuade we who live near the proposed site or the two board members who voted no, that the lives of the residents would not be seriously impacted by a twenty-four-hour cacophony of barking dogs.
I would like to address the tone of the anonymous pulse line entry. I have been reading newspapers for more than sixty years, and have noticed over the years that most letters are polite and well-reasoned regardless of what point of view they address. The letters from people who are angry beyond reason and whose arguments are flimsy usually devolve into name calling and snarky sarcasm. The insulting words “buffoons”, “snowflakes” and “knuckleheads” in the pulse line entry are the ammunition of someone who is engaged in an up-hill intellectual battle. Whoever submitted that entry would be better off channeling Winston Churchill than Andrew Dice Clay.
Finally, I would like to speak directly to all home owners and residents of Westfield. I believe we owe a debt of gratitude to the two Planning Board members who voted no, because had that business been allowed at that site, it would have opened the door to any loud obnoxious business to spring up in a vacant lot or barn near you. We all have a right to peace and quiet and to the expectation that our property values will not be ignored by the various boards and departments of city government. Westfield is a nice place to live, and I will close by repeating what I said at during the Planning Board public meeting; This is not a case of “Not in my backyard”, because a commercial boarding eighty dog kennel does not belong in anyone’s backyard!
Thank you,
Louis Saltus
