COMMUNICATIONS – CITY OFFICIALS
Jeff Gahan begins by reading a letter about drainage written by a Savannah Drive resident, condemns "a recurring theme" unchecked development. Reads another letter: "Just do something." $75,000 isn't enough. Open to how it's handled, whether it comes from EDIT or where. Doesn't matter, as long as "we address it." must take some action tonight."
Benedetti: "My heart goes out" to all the victims. Are we opening something that could be open-ended? We had asked for people to fill out tort claims for the lawyers to examine. "We know 75's not enough," but the lawyers should come back after examining the tort claims to tell us what is and isn't coming.
Gahan: Asks whether anyone from storm, sewer or EMC is present. Nope. He doesn't want it to be direct reimbursement to people, because Benedetti is afraid that it will turn into direct reimbursement.
Price: Every time we throw out money ... stormwater wasn't supposed to be paid in the beginning ... raises, promotions ... "we're in a depression" ... "code enforcement, whatever it is, tired of money going in someone's pocket."
Not his, though.
Gahan wants the crowd to return and monitor the votes. Tonight a resolution.
Price: Isn't it going to open up ... mumble ... "everyone in New Albany has had some kind of problem." ould be a "major tort claim." Coffey refuses to gavel the discussion so that he can determine how best to interject himself into it.
Gonder: Shouldn't we put a moratorium on building and development in the affected areas?
Coffey: Maybe everywhere?
This is fractured and the give and take is fast. Hard for me to keep up. Who gets included? How many are here? Aren't? Procedures? Who to thrash?
Coffey: "I'm going to call a spade a spade -- the people who let this happen" are still there. Wants to have an executive session. Coffey urges Stan Robison to take part in the many meetings to come. Coffey in essence says that the council has to take over all planning and zoning decisions.
Robison: Some developers favored. "Smart-ass" engineer came in and said it was an act of God; problems with enforcement and accountability. The administration shouldn't be dismissive. "Moral more than legal" problem. Council doesn't decide liability, but it controls purse strings. Stormwater raised all those salaries in spite of the council's preference; remember that during budget time. "People have no relief" in spite of raised pay.
COMMUNICATIONS – MAYOR
Not here.
APPOINTMENTS:
Police Merit Commission – Bob Dusch -- approved very fast.
Coming back with more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I might pass out soon
Daniel, at least you're getting PAID. (NOTE: I properly used "you're."
I can't feel my legs
I was sitting next to Daniel S, up front. I left at 9:35. Reading this is hilarious.
On a more serious note, when Mr. Coffey said that the plan commission was basically responsible for allowing all the development, a (flooded)lady behind me asked, under her breath, who sits on it. I turned around and told her that Coffey had, but he won't tell you that tonight. She said, "Figures".
And the plan commission is responsible for administering the rules set out by the Council.
The Board of Zoning Appeals can grant individual variances but zoning changes and PUDDs typically go before the Council for approval.
What would be interesting is to review the developments in question to see if A)they met the Council's guidelines, or, if they didn't, B) which authority gave approval for the exception.
It would also be interesting to see how many Council decisions match the guidelines set forth in the comprehensive plan, also approved by the Council. They historically have a habit of ignoring it, thereby negating their own rules.
I think a point that was kind of missed is that if it's just one house going up, they don't have to come to any board, including sewer or stormwater.
True, Daniel, but generally that it is happening in developments that have already been approved for X amount of houses(lots).
It's actually still kind of passing the buck. Different boards, commissions and the council have been involved in those development approvals.
Like Mark, I think that's true if the house being built meets the current zoning stipulations on the property. It would be a "by right" development under those circumstances, essentially preapproved by Council edict.
If drainage is such a problem in a given area that any new development will create problems, that area's zoning may need to be revisited.
Keep in mind, of course:
Coffey — who is the council president and member of the plan commission — said there comes a time when people should be allowed to develop their land.
From one of Daniel's articles in March.
Unintentionally punning, when matters reach the saturation point, then the one vacant lot that acts as a de facto catch basin becomes vitally important -- and since it's grandfathered, it can be used to build overnight.
It would seem to indicate value in two things: the favoring of adaptively reusing infrastructure that's already proven it's ability to properly function and the retention of green space.
Excellent recall of the Coffey quote. Wasn't that quote in reference to developement just east of Klerner where a lot of these problems have been occuring?
Post a Comment