Somers Wharf shops eyed for residential units
A company that hopes to convert several shops into residences responded to residents who have argued the proposal is a detriment to the town.
Meyer & Company late last year sought planning approval to convert 14, 16 and 18 Water Street, all at Somers Wharf West, from retail units to residential units.
The proposal has received push back from East End residents and business owners, including the tenant of one of the units proposed for conversion, sparking a public forum last week.
A letter from the Meyer Properties included in the planning application said that it had struggled to keep retail tenants in the spaces despite decreased rents.
“While the company strives to support the vibrant live-shop-enjoy atmosphere of the area, dedicating non-street facing units to visitor-focused retail is increasingly becoming economically unviable,” the company said.
“Despite heavy investment, maintaining consistent retail tenants has been a challenge. Meyer has achieved relatively low turnover rates and limited its vacancies by keeping rental rates low and through seasonal adjusted rates.
“Rents to some tenants are now just a few hundred dollars a month and vacancies are increasingly difficult to fill.”
The company added that it was committed to keeping all units facing Water Street as retail spaces and that while a portion of courtyard would be adapted to provide tenants with a private outdoor space, a publicly accessible walkway would remain along the waterfront.
“The businesses occupying these courtyard buildings have historically suffered in terms of light foot traffic, given their setback from Water Street,” the letter said.
“As retail shops, the proposed units fail to take full advantage of their waterside location and views.
“Somers Wharf internal courtyard nooks and crannies were intended to recreate the intimate walkways St George’s is known for. However, in reality the area provides ample cover and protection for drinking, loitering and illicit activity.”
The proposal garnered a series of objections.
Rachel Perry, owner of The Things We Love, a retail business based in one of the units, said her rent was “certainly not a few hundred dollars” but sales were on the upswing.
“My sales are growing at a rate of 35 per cent annually,” she said. “Meyers state that if residential a tenant would spend money in the community. However, I doubt very much that they would contribute the equivalent that I receive in sales and therefore translating into an income and a respected business in the community.”
She also said the area got good foot traffic and that the removal of retail outlets for the area would make it less of a draw for visitors.
“In my opinion, this request is definitely about greed and collecting higher rents without any regard to the aesthetic of St George’s or any of the other local businesses and how they would also suffer,” she said.
In a response letter, Meyers said Ms Perry was a valued tenant but noted that one of the other affected tenants had already relocated and the third was “agreeable” to reducing the size of their shop.
“Ms Perry has been given over a year’s notice for this potential development and we would be happy to consider her for any of our other, more suitable retail locations if they come available,” the company said.
The company added that her per-square-foot rent was half that of businesses on Water Street and that she had received discounted rents during low seasons and throughout the pandemic.
“We very much appreciate Ms Perry as a tenant and local entrepreneur, and we wish her and her business great success,” the company said.
“We understand it will be very challenging indeed to find a comparable space with a similar rent, as most retail shops in St George’s are located, appropriately, directly on street fronts and thus will be more expensive.
“As the unit she has been occupying is set back in the courtyard and thus the rent has been depressed, she will surely find the reality of market rents higher than what she is used to, particularly by the square foot.
“Although we are sympathetic, we cannot hold back on the opportunity to potentially reimagine this area to bring it to its full potential.”
Jill Raine, an artist and St George’s resident, wrote in an objection letter that the proposal would change the “area of ambiance” to a gated community.
Meyer responded that property owners and investors needed to adapt to changing circumstances.
“With Meyer’s current proposal, we seek to consolidate our retail efforts on Water Street, and create a small residential pocket in the inner Somers Wharf courtyard in an effort to diversify our community and increase our resilience,” the company wrote.
Tara Cassidy said in another letter that she was concerned the application would set a precedent that would lead to other ground floor St George’s businesses being shuttered.
Meyers, however, said that it was common in St George’s for buildings to have street-facing retail components and residential units above or behind them.
The Bermuda Environmental Sustainability Taskforce wrote a letter of concern regarding the project, while the Bermuda National Trust submitted a letter of representation urging that the plans be carefully considered.
Charlotte Andrews, head of cultural heritage for the trust, said: “We understand that much of the historic Town of St George has mixed-use zoning to provide for flexibility within the living town.
“We also understand that the application concerns private property, which may give the owner some rights to maximise its revenue, enhance security and adjust types of use.
“As landlords ourselves, we appreciate the need for flexibility of use and sustainable revenue.
“However, the vision of the Wilkinson family and the principals of Meyer & Company in creating this area has been admired and enjoyed for more than 40 years. We would be distressed to see it radically changed.”
Need to
Know
2. Please respect the use of this community forum and its users.
3. Any poster that insults, threatens or verbally abuses another member, uses defamatory language, or deliberately disrupts discussions will be banned.
4. Users who violate the Terms of Service or any commenting rules will be banned.
5. Please stay on topic. "Trolling" to incite emotional responses and disrupt conversations will be deleted.
6. To understand further what is and isn't allowed and the actions we may take, please read our Terms of Service