Comments on: Parkside: Almost Time To Retire This Category http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/ If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen. — Samuel Adams Wed, 23 May 2012 16:33:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bryan Freeborn http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35566 Bryan Freeborn Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:05:12 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35566 Barry...I think you do have her all wrong. You should give her a call to ask her details. I think that her donor base is comprised of people that work with her and feel that she is the their best bet for someone on council they can communicate with, not necessarily someone they agree with. I also think that there is a group of political donors in AVL that spread their money around to folks they think have the best chance of winning. A prime example is Morrisani, who has given to Brownie, Smith, and Manheimer. Based on the conversations I have had with people on both sides of this issue they are all wanting the same thing. A clear process with clear standards. If we put all our eggs in the basket of council we loose. She has by far the widest spectrum of support. She also has the highest level of credentials of anyone running or currently on council. She is smarter than the city's legal department. This is very important if we want to actually implement the progressive land use policies that have been put on the table over the years. We need people on council that know policy, law, and budgets. Then there is this choice. Bothwell, Smith, Manheimer or Bothwell, Smith, Mumpower. There are other ways this could go as well. Robin Cape can not possibly get enough people to write her name in to win a seat on council. 500 people possibly, 1000 people tough, 5000 people I seriously doubt it. I could be wrong, but I don;t think so in this case. As far as I see it, any vote cast for Robin is a vote for Mumpower. Depending on who comes out to vote and who stays home will determine who Mumpower edges out do to the Robin factor. Barry…I think you do have her all wrong. You should give her a call to ask her details. I think that her donor base is comprised of people that work with her and feel that she is the their best bet for someone on council they can communicate with, not necessarily someone they agree with. I also think that there is a group of political donors in AVL that spread their money around to folks they think have the best chance of winning. A prime example is Morrisani, who has given to Brownie, Smith, and Manheimer.

Based on the conversations I have had with people on both sides of this issue they are all wanting the same thing. A clear process with clear standards. If we put all our eggs in the basket of council we loose.

She has by far the widest spectrum of support. She also has the highest level of credentials of anyone running or currently on council. She is smarter than the city’s legal department. This is very important if we want to actually implement the progressive land use policies that have been put on the table over the years. We need people on council that know policy, law, and budgets.

Then there is this choice. Bothwell, Smith, Manheimer or Bothwell, Smith, Mumpower. There are other ways this could go as well. Robin Cape can not possibly get enough people to write her name in to win a seat on council. 500 people possibly, 1000 people tough, 5000 people I seriously doubt it. I could be wrong, but I don;t think so in this case. As far as I see it, any vote cast for Robin is a vote for Mumpower. Depending on who comes out to vote and who stays home will determine who Mumpower edges out do to the Robin factor.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: barry http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35565 barry Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:23:32 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35565 Brian- I would have to see more specifics of the changes she recommends. I would be more comfortable if these changes weren't being suggested by someone who works for developers, has said she would favor selling park land for condominiums, and is supported by Albert Sneed and Lou Bissette. Maybe I have her all wrong, but that seems like a poor pedigree on development issues from where I sit. Brian-

I would have to see more specifics of the changes she recommends. I would be more comfortable if these changes weren’t being suggested by someone who works for developers, has said she would favor selling park land for condominiums, and is supported by Albert Sneed and Lou Bissette. Maybe I have her all wrong, but that seems like a poor pedigree on development issues from where I sit.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Bryan Freeborn http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35564 Bryan Freeborn Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:09:58 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35564 Berry...It is my understanding that Esther wants to fix a broken system that is ripe for manipulation, even with Council having final approval. As it stands now even if staff says no to a project, the applicant can go before council and get approval by Council. I have rarely seen council say no to a project, even with vocal and broad community disapproval. From Esther's Website: "With regard to development, I favor a system where, with the input of our citizens, the City codifies all the development standards we want and need to preserve Asheville. These standards could include requirements regarding: height restrictions, green building standards, percentage of affordable housing in any project, impact fees that go to support sidewalks, greenways, etc., and other standards that we think are vital to preserving the Asheville we know and love. Currently, these standards do not exist in the City’s ordinances. Right now, projects over a certain size, go before council without being subject to specific standards. Council must decide the fate of the project based on a standard that is more or less as follows: “Is this project good for the City?” This question is obviously answered differently by different people. Developers try to sell their project by adding components that they hope are attractive to council, such as affordable housing. However, there are not specific requirements for affordable housing, height limitations, and other elements of the project. I am proposing that the citizens decide now, through a public process, what those standards should be and then put those standards into law. Developers who can meet these standards can do their project. Under this system, citizens would maintain the right to appeal if they felt the standards were not being enforced or met. This process allows everyone to have a clear understanding of the strict development guidelines and everyone will understand what they can expect from the process. With strict development standards built into the zoning ordinances, citizens can be assured that future councils cannot stray from the rules we adopt today." http://www.esther4asheville.com/ Berry…It is my understanding that Esther wants to fix a broken system that is ripe for manipulation, even with Council having final approval. As it stands now even if staff says no to a project, the applicant can go before council and get approval by Council. I have rarely seen council say no to a project, even with vocal and broad community disapproval.

From Esther’s Website: “With regard to development, I favor a system where, with the input of our citizens, the City codifies all the development standards we want and need to preserve Asheville. These standards could include requirements regarding: height restrictions, green building standards, percentage of affordable housing in any project, impact fees that go to support sidewalks, greenways, etc., and other standards that we think are vital to preserving the Asheville we know and love. Currently, these standards do not exist in the City’s ordinances. Right now, projects over a certain size, go before council without being subject to specific standards. Council must decide the fate of the project based on a standard that is more or less as follows: “Is this project good for the City?” This question is obviously answered differently by different people. Developers try to sell their project by adding components that they hope are attractive to council, such as affordable housing. However, there are not specific requirements for affordable housing, height limitations, and other elements of the project. I am proposing that the citizens decide now, through a public process, what those standards should be and then put those standards into law. Developers who can meet these standards can do their project. Under this system, citizens would maintain the right to appeal if they felt the standards were not being enforced or met. This process allows everyone to have a clear understanding of the strict development guidelines and everyone will understand what they can expect from the process. With strict development standards built into the zoning ordinances, citizens can be assured that future councils cannot stray from the rules we adopt today.” http://www.esther4asheville.com/

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: barry http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35562 barry Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:40:27 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35562 Bryan - maybe you know this. Is it true that Esther Manheimer wants to remove Council review on all developments, even the ones above 100,000 sq. ft? This would leave all approvals to the staff, which would guarantee Parkside a smooth ride if/when Stewart re-submits it... Bryan – maybe you know this. Is it true that Esther Manheimer wants to remove Council review on all developments, even the ones above 100,000 sq. ft? This would leave all approvals to the staff, which would guarantee Parkside a smooth ride if/when Stewart re-submits it…

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Bryan Freeborn http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35561 Bryan Freeborn Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:19:21 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35561 We need council to change the standards manual that the TRC uses to evaluate projects. Until that document is changed we are going to be chasing our tails as a community. Then comes the UDO. We need council to change the standards manual that the TRC uses to evaluate projects. Until that document is changed we are going to be chasing our tails as a community. Then comes the UDO.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: barry http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35557 barry Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:43:31 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35557 From the AC-T article: "The condo plan was originally approved by city staff and, Tuch said, would almost surely be approved again under current rules should the plan be resubmitted and the tavern plan dropped." I'm just sayin'... From the AC-T article:

“The condo plan was originally approved by city staff and, Tuch said, would almost surely be approved again under current rules should the plan be resubmitted and the tavern plan dropped.”

I’m just sayin’…

Rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

]]> By: barry http://scrutinyhooligans.us/2009/10/12/parkside-almost-time-to-retire-this-category/comment-page-1/#comment-35544 barry Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:25:47 +0000 http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=9337#comment-35544 Absent his appeal being rejected, there's still nothing stopping Mr. Coleman from simply waiting for a new Council and a reviving economy to re-submit his plans. He still has - how much? $3 - 4 million invested in this, & he's content to try to recoup that one beer at a time? I don't buy it. Investing a hundred thou or so in this tavern really only amounts to him killing time until the appeal comes back. If he wants us to trust that he has given up on Parkside, why is he still fighting the lawsuit? Why hasn't he given the stolen park land back to us? This zombie could rise from the grave again, unless we elect candidates committed to preserving our public spaces, not privatizing them. With at least one 'progressive' candidate openly saying she would be willing to sell our parkland off for condos, I'm not comfortable at all. I'll celebrate when the land is officially turned back over to the public, there is a permanent covenant protecting this from happening again, and not before. Absent his appeal being rejected, there’s still nothing stopping Mr. Coleman from simply waiting for a new Council and a reviving economy to re-submit his plans. He still has – how much? $3 – 4 million invested in this, & he’s content to try to recoup that one beer at a time? I don’t buy it. Investing a hundred thou or so in this tavern really only amounts to him killing time until the appeal comes back. If he wants us to trust that he has given up on Parkside, why is he still fighting the lawsuit? Why hasn’t he given the stolen park land back to us?

This zombie could rise from the grave again, unless we elect candidates committed to preserving our public spaces, not privatizing them. With at least one ‘progressive’ candidate openly saying she would be willing to sell our parkland off for condos, I’m not comfortable at all. I’ll celebrate when the land is officially turned back over to the public, there is a permanent covenant protecting this from happening again, and not before.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>