After attending the last four planning commission meetings and hearing a majority of planning commission members state unequivocally that they were not at all near ready to provide a yes or no answer regarding approval of the downtown overlay district zoning change, I was astonished to read the following in a letter addressed to the city council:
"The Planning Commission strongly supports the adoption of an amendment to create a Downtown Mixed Use Core Overlay District to facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized sites within the downtown core, including the Burlington Town Center. The area included in the proposed DMUC District is one of the most underdeveloped, and is an appropriate location for additional height and greater density within the City. The Commission believes that the current zoning for these sites is inadequate to facilitate the redevelopment of these sites in a way that significantly advances the vision of planBTV: Downtown and Waterfront...".
Not
only is this a gross misrepresentation of the views of the commission,
but this misrepresentation is the third of its kind to occur over the
last few weeks. The first was exposed by Councilor Sharon Bushor, who
noted that the packets made up for the planning commission asserted that
the city council, strongly recommended approval of the zoning change.
The second occurred at the planning meeting on Wednesday, when the
summary of commissioners' views was grossly misrepresented and, we
thought, corrected, by the commissioners who were present.
This last, on the eve of an important, but rushed, public hearing, is
the most grievous; and surely represents a dereliction of duty on the
part of Mr. White. I am certain that the planning commissioners will
speak up themselves about this, but as a citizen who has been watching
the hard work of the commission over the last few weeks I wanted to
testify to my outrage at this conduct. Whether the summary created by
Mr. White and Meagan Tuttle can be corrected soon enough before the
public hearing to allow all involved parties proper time to digest the
material remains to be seen. Perhaps it will make more sense to put off
the hearing until a faithful document can be produced for careful
scrutiny by the planning commissioners before it is presented to the
public. In any case, I will surely not be the only citizen who will have
questions if this sort of thing is allowed to continue.
You are most certainly not the only citizen with grave misgivings about this process, David White's role, and overload created by a developer who has the council and staff too eager to please. Staff reported that planning commissioners have been required to attend 80 meetings in the past 12 months, and this zoning amendment for the downtown core is cramming meetings and work sessions and public hearings into a few weeks around Fourth of July. City councilor said weeks ago that PC approval is assured, so are these meeting all for show? Do the commissioners know that? They seem to be sincerely evaluating each item. ???
ReplyDeleteYou are most certainly not the only citizen with grave misgivings about this process, David White's role, and overload created by a developer who has the council and staff too eager to please. Staff reported that planning commissioners have been required to attend 80 meetings in the past 12 months, and this zoning amendment for the downtown core is cramming meetings and work sessions and public hearings into a few weeks around Fourth of July. City councilor said weeks ago that PC approval is assured, so are these meeting all for show? Do the commissioners know that? They seem to be sincerely evaluating each item. ???
ReplyDelete