Sunday, July 06, 2008

The insipidity never ceases, so here comes the Wizard's anti-progress resolution ... again.

I was glancing at the city council agenda for Monday, July 7, and noticed R-08-35 batting leadoff, which upon closer examination closely resembles R-08-34, itself a piece of legislative irrelevance that was defeated 6-3 at the council’s June 19 conclave.

Resolutions are one and out, so now, like the New Albanian Night of the Living Dead, here it comes again!

Both the rejected -34 and the reconstituted -35 might otherwise be known as 1st district CM Dan “Wizard of Westside” Coffey’s last ditch Magna Farta, both ingloriously transparent attempts to (a) stymie the irresistible free market-driven tide of progress headed his way, because (b) altering the decaying character of the neighborhood that Coffey has done absolutely nothing to improve during a career of under-achievement deters the inveterate poli-fabricationist’s ability to frighten his constituents into fearing ideas, people and aspects of life on Earth that the councilman loathes ... although, always and eternally, he's unable to imagine alternatives.

We described the council scene last time here: Coffey council comedic relief for Thursday, June 19.

In the exhumed resolution, there are only three changes.

Now it is noted that the council “originally established a zoning code”, with “originally” omitted before.

Now, when it is written that the council seeks a zoning change for the neighborhood, the passage reads, “along with a majority of homeowners (the council) desires to change the zoning status.”

Last month’s resolution called for a zoning change from R4 to RN1. This one mandates R4 to R2 or RN1.

The Great Civic Necromancer’s reference to a “majority of homeowners” surely refers to the mysterious petition that Coffey has referred to at various junctures during his valiant struggle to prevent the Lopp real estate firm from doing what might, at this late date, be the only feasible thing in a chronically neglected neighborhood suffering grievously from 65% rental property presence (that is, short of restoring the native hardwood forest as a long-term investment in timber futures).

That'd be paying people cash for their land and buildings, clearing away the slumlord’s handiwork, and starting all over again outside the restrictions imposed by Coffey's preferred political lifestyle of self-aggrandizing decay management.

Lopp proposes a massive investment in the future of the city, and Coffey hurriedly rallies the wailing and waning ghosts of the past to thwart it, and once again the council must waste precious time to consider what amounts to a pathetic filibuster against modern living conducted by as discredited an agent of past flatulent errors as could be conceived by a writer of fiction.

Except it’s all too real, and so it goes in Coffey’s and 3rd District Un-CM Steve Price’s preferred habitat, the Open Air Museum of Ignorance, Superstition and Backwardness.

Here are the definitions of the zoning terminology, followed by the ordinances in question.

R-4 - Multi-Family (High Density). This district has similar characteristics and permitted uses as R-3 (medium, not high density). It is designed for areas of higher density development. Development on septic tank fields is prohibited.

R-2 - Urban Residential. This district is designed for areas where development will occur on group sanitary waste disposal systems and sewers. The permitted use in this district is single-family residential.

RN-1 - Neighborhood Residential. This district is designated for higher density single-family development and two-family dwellings where approved through Conditional Use. Development on septic tanks is prohibited.



3 comments:

  1. I'll wager that the word "insipidity" won't have been posted on a blog anywhere in the English-speaking world in the past seven (seventy?) days.

    Oh, thank you, NA-Wan-Kenobi, for enriching the blogosphere with an appreciation for precisely the perfect word for the futility expressed from the westward precincts.

    I can't necessarily say how I feel about the "issue," but I could make the case either way. Why then, can't a council member who has drawn 8 1/2 years of salary craft a rational ordinance?

    Don't the residents of the First District (and the rest of the taxpayers in New Albany) deserve a refund.

    ReplyDelete
  2. my vocab has increased so much due to reading NAC! i'm not too proud to say that i often reach for the thesaurus tool, in order to connect the dots with some of the words. i might even go as far as crediting NAC for helping me
    with the use of english language than my eng-101 or 102 classes..lol...

    i'd like to reserve a seat for the next meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jeff, for some reason I can't access your email. You can reach mine at danielshort22@gmail.com. Thanks for the help, Dan

    ReplyDelete