The Green Mouse went out to forage last night, and he came back with this interesting tidbit -- today's special at the Floyd Boobocracy Rumor Mill.
Amid talk of Floyd County's perennially unimaginative political leadership cadre replenishing its coffers by selling Community Park's Grant Line Road frontage to property developers, thus making short-term profitable asphalt sausage from the last existing green space inside the beltway, now comes a strong hint that up to 18 acres of parkland is being considered for future development.
I'm told by a reliable source that county planner Don Lopp recently released a Request for Development (to the general development population) for proposals to devour up to 18 acres of Community Park for development, and that the Parks Department had no prior knowledge of this action.
As such, the smelly morass of parks district legislation proposed earlier in 2011 bubbles yet again to the surface, in the sense that seemingly just last week, political seat-holders now expressing keen interest in paving the city's green space were accusing the parks board of precisely the same objective.
Who to believe? And how many showers must one poor blogger take when reporting the news of greed? Okay, readers: Tell us what you know, up front or down low.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I would like to provide some context and information to the posting.
The County was approached in February by members of the Historic Preservation League to consider potential users for a readaptive reuse of the North Annex facility since the County purchased Pineview Elementary.
In the process, the preservation league has provided three potential users which have expressed an interest in either student or senior housing.
The County initially was interested solely in discussing the footprint of the site (4-6 acres depending on configuration).
The historic preservationists requested the County expand the possible acreage to 18 acres. The County has developed a RFP which I am willing to send to any interested party.
Please contact me at either -
dlopp@floydcounty.in.gov or (812)948.4110
Sincerely
Don Lopp
Director of Operations and County Planning, Floyd County, IN
Expanded to 18 acres for what purpose?
Investigate Family Scholar House. Though 18 acres seems rather expansive for their program.
Raw speed is king.
Don:
I’m not familiar with the “Historic Preservation League .”
Since actions of one preservation organization often are mistakenly attributed to another, despite little or no overlap in leadership or mission, can you clarify? Might you have meant:
1. Indiana Landmarks (statewide preservation non-profit),
2. Heritage Preservation League of New Albany-Floyd County (countywide preservation non-profit),
3. Historic Preservation Commission (city governmental unit), or
4. Floyd County Historical Society (general history non-profit without focus on buildings).
Thank You
"A great high wall there tried to stop me
A great big sign there said private property
But on the other side it didn’t say nothing
That side was made for you and me." - Woody Guthrie
Apologies for being uninformed, but I've wondered what the connection between Don Lopp and Lopp Development Inc. is many times.
Are they related? Massive conflict-of-interest if they are.
In response to Mr. Chandler and Mr. Coyle comments -
Regarding the entities involved for preservationists - Landmarks and the Hertiage Preservation League - I apologize for any confusion on my part on the misidentification of the League's name. Both have stated an interested in keeping the frontage green.
On the issue of conflict of interest and family ties, I am more than willing to provide the following information.
1. Yes, I am related to John Lopp who is the real estate developer. His father and my grandfather were brothers from Mauckport, IN. I have made this known to all boards that I work with - Floyd County Plan Commission, Floyd County Board of Zoning Appeals, Floyd County Commissioners, etc...
2. As a professional planner, I prescribe to a code of ethics. The task of creating an RFP for my employer in my opinion does not rise to the level of a conflict of interest.
However, if Mr. Lopp or a group he was associated with submitted a proposal - I would as I have in the past with items involving him and my office recuse myself from any of the proceeding regarding the RFP selection process.
I hope this clears up this matter and I am available to discuss this matter further if you would like Mr. Coyle. (812)948.4110 or email:dlopp@floydcounty.in.gov
Sincerely
Don Lopp
From the American Institute of Certified Planners Code of Ethics:
A: Principles to Which We Aspire
1. Our Overall Responsibility to the Public
Our primary obligation is to serve the public interest and we, therefore, owe our allegiance to a conscientiously attained concept of the public interest that is formulated through continuous and open debate. We shall achieve high standards of professional integrity, proficiency, and knowledge. To comply with our obligation to the public, we aspire to the following principles:
a) We shall always be conscious of the rights of others.
b) We shall have special concern for the long-range consequences of present actions.
c) We shall pay special attention to the interrelatedness of decisions.
d) We shall provide timely, adequate, clear, and accurate information on planning issues to all affected persons and to governmental decision makers.
e) We shall give people the opportunity to have a meaningful impact on the development of plans and programs that may affect them. Participation should be broad enough to include those who lack formal organization or influence.
f) We shall seek social justice by working to expand choice and opportunity for all persons, recognizing a special responsibility to plan for the needs of the disadvantaged and to promote racial and economic integration. We shall urge the alteration of policies, institutions, and decisions that oppose such needs.
g) We shall promote excellence of design and endeavor to conserve and preserve the integrity and heritage of the natural and built environment.
h) We shall deal fairly with all participants in the planning process. Those of us who are public officials or employees shall also deal evenhandedly with all planning process participants.
Thank you Josh for posting those elements of the AICP code of ethics.
As stated in earlier posts, I am always available and willing to discuss the RFP and process.
My contact information has been listed in a earlier posting.
Jeff Gillenwater said ... Expanded to 18 acres for what purpose?
I appreciate the discussion of ethics, thank you all.
But what has not been answered is Jeff's question above.
Don, can yo tell us what the expansion of the area means in practical terms, i.e., does this lessen or enhance the chances of it staying green?
The RFP seeks a redevelopment proposal that is an innovative re-adaptive approach to the site and building and will maintain and reuse the existing facility and will seamlessly incorporate the proposal with the adjacent community park.
There are several components at work - historic preservation, adaptive reuse, community green space - From my perspective as planner, I would envision something that can be designed with the features of the park
hope this explanation helps...
Sincerely
Don Lopp
I appreciate your time, Don, but that really doesn't answer my question. You mentioned that the original thought was to make 4-6 acres available but that preservationists requested an expansion to 18 acres.
Why? What is someone going to do with 18 acres that they couldn't do with 4-6? Is there an entity proposing something specific that requires more land? What thinking led to the expanded offering?
Given their abysmal communication record lately, it would be helpful for the public to know what's happening on the preservation front *before* any governmental commitments are made.
As an addendum, a News and Tribune article mentioned Family Scholar House being interested in building housing on 12 acres in addition to reusing the existing building.
12 acres for housing? Why so much?
Post a Comment