Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Thank you

We want to thank Alderman Schulter for a successful Community Meeting last night.

The proposed zoning change was voted down last night, not necessarily the proposed project.

It is most important that the community be informed and participate, than anything else.

We want say "thank you" to the Pilgrim Lutheran Church and their pastor - for hosting the meeting.

We want to thank the developer, his attorney and his architects for taking the time to present their proposed project. "Thank You"

But most of all we want to THANK the community for getting involved and for showing concern for their neighborhood.

4 comments:

Ron Shook said...

Tom,

What a gracious post.

Just a small bone to pick with your wording:

>>>Not because the current project was voted down<<<

The zoning change was voted against, not necessarily the project. I was pretty impressed with the quality of the project and while still concerned about congestion in that stretch of the neighborhood should the project go through, I would have been happy to have voiced my regard for a project that kept within the perameters of the current zoning, primarily height restrictions, with limited offset changes. Staying within the boundaries of the current zoning would necessarily make the project smaller and lessen congestion concerns. It was a nice building in absolutely the wrong place. The same building, 2 floors shorter, would have been welcomed with open arms by most in the neighborhood. I suspect that most who voted against the zoning change had similar feelings.

Ron Shook

Anonymous said...

From Margaret - at 1800 Belle Plaine:

Congratulations and THANK YOU to everyone. It shows that we need to work together to make and keep a good neighborhood. It also was interesting and (usually) nice to meet everyone.

Anonymous said...

Way to go neighbors! Power to the people!

Bill Moran

Ron Shook said...

Tom,

What a gracious post.

I was quite impressed with the quality of the project and while still concerned about congestion in that stretch of the neighborhood should the project go through, I would have been happy to have voiced my regard for a project that kept within the perameters of the current zoning, primarily height restrictions, with limited offset changes. Staying within the boundaries of the current zoning would necessarily make the project smaller and lessen congestion concerns. It was a nice building in the wrong place at the wrong height. The same building, 2 floors shorter, would have been welcomed with open arms by most in the neighborhood. I suspect that most who voted against the zoning change had similar feelings.

I would also like to raise a caution, not to you, but to others at the meeting. I was a little distressed by the uncivil hotness of some of comments from "our" side, particularly from the peanut gallery. If there were any fence sitters at the meeting, that didn't do any good and cost a few votes. I would have also liked to have seen someone from our side praise the quality of the presentation of the project and the project itself and ask that the project continue within the bounds of current zoning without height variance. That would have gained a few votes. I was prepared to do it myself but didn't get called on.

On the other side of the coin, why could North Center Neighbors not have had a formal presentation, the same as the developer? Something to ask for next time, perhaps? If we are refused, hand everyone a one page statement of our reasons for opposition.

I have little doubt that there was some chicanery going on vis-a-vis this community voting meeting and some of the "neighborhood voters," but I suspect that there were at least a few neighbors there who made their decision at the meeting and we need to speak to them, not to our own often justified anger. Grassroots community organization overcame any possible questionable practices, and if there is a next time, lets not risk throwing it away out of anger. The vote wasn't that overwhelming.

Ron Shook