 The Amsterdam Zone VIII
|
Jan. 12th, 2009 @ 12:27 pm 
|
|---|
Well, I guess I should be grateful. The last time The Recorder mentioned me in an editorial, they called me a "monster". This time at least they made some effort to address the real issues of the preliminary zoning report drafted by myself and Attorney Paul Wollman, albeit without apparently reading it, before relapsing into ad hominem attacks.
Let us review. In and about 2002 The Saratoga Associates were well-paid to help with the process and prepare the City's updated Master Plan, and in connection with same made several specific recommendations regarding zoning, recommendations which Paul and I discussed and reduced to a proposed Local Law for the purpose of implementation.
The Recorder asks, "if it was really that easy and they are in agreement with Thane that current zoning laws are hampering development, why didn't they draft those changes years ago?"
Well, the short answer for Mr. Wollman is that he wasn't the Corporation Counsel after the Master Plan was adopted in 2003. The short answer for me is I did.
In December of 2004 (I became Corporation Counsel in August of that year), I presented a proposed Local Law dealing with the Downtown zoning problems to Mayor Emanuele at his request as part of his continuing efforts to implement the recommendations of the Master Plan. The Common Council then voted to send same on to the Montgomery County Planning Board and the city Planning Commission for discussion, debate and approval or denial. Both bodies raised specific objections to the proposal and returned same to the Common Council for further action. The Council then tabled the proposed Local Law and it was never heard from again.
The following year, following the usual personal attacks on me, Alderman Wills proposed and the Council agreed to set up a huge committee of about seventeen people to redraft the zoning law. No provision was made for putting anyone in charge, rules of procedure , or anything else, other than that I was not to be trusted with the sacred duty. One meeting was held and that ended that.
And so the matter stood until Mayor Thane decided that $50,000 was a good price to pay for work that had already been done and paid for once.
Now, I must admit that my first aborted attempt in 2004 went beyond the Master Plan and instead envisioned a broader "Opportunity Zone" where all uses not otherwise prohibited in the city would be permitted. I accompanied that radical proposal with a report designed to jump-start the thinking process. "I look forward to a wide-open discussion," I said, and there the discussion ended.
What we did over the recent Christmas break was strictly ministerial in nature. Neither Paul nor I imposed any of our own ideology in drafting the proposed Local Law. Instead, we took the language of the Master Plan, studied it in relation to the current Zoning Law, and put into legalese that which was required to implement it. We divided the law into subsections which could be easily excised and debated.
Procedure need not be invented here (let alone paid for separately). If the Common Council chooses to use our proposal as the basis for discussion, they need only submit same to the two planning entities, where those most familiar with local land use practices could conduct their own hearings. At that point it would be returned to the Council for their own public hearings and debate. Anything the Common Council doesn't like, they can remove.
"As for Wollman and Going, they can be part of the process, but they shouldn't be running the show."
I agree. Our elected officials should be guiding the process, not outside consultants. I would hope they would consider the input of two knowledgeable citizens, but if not, there are other things I can do with my life.
*********
FROM THE ARCHIVES (December 17, 2004):
To: Mayor, Common Council, City and County Planning Commissions
Re: Proposed change in Zoning Ordinance
One of the issues raised in the City’s Master Plan was the need to review and update the City Zoning Ordinance. Particular mention was made of the area bordered on the north by Forbes street and the Route 5 West arterial, south by the river, east by the city line and west by the Route 30 south arterial, what used to be the “Urban Core” of the city. Anyone who has lived in this city for more than a few years can see quite plainly that what once was an Urban Core no longer exists. Fifty years ago factories, shops, homes, offices, service facilities and even pool halls coexisted side by side through this corridor. The storefronts on East Main Street nearly all had apartments, fraternal clubs and professional offices on their upper floors.
Then in the 1960’s and 70’s federal and state money poured into the city to completely change the dynamic of “Downtown”. The tens of millions spent resulted in change, but certainly not prosperity. I need not go into the complete history. It is well known to all of us.
In reviewing the Master Plan recommendations, one question keeps jumping up: “Are we a City?” Do we want to be a city? If we do, then we need to look at the factors that are stifling development. I submit that one of them is an overly-complex zoning system. As noted in the master plan, the modern trend is to simplify the zones, with a view to logically transition space from urban core to country. One of the best ways to reestablish an urban core, it seems to me, is to break loose and let anything go in that area.
First of all, nothing else has worked. No planning genius has rescued downtown. Is there any planner who can honestly say that he or she knows for sure what is the highest and best use of the land along Main Street? It is already in practice and history a mixed-use area. Urban Cores always are, by their nature. We should not be discouraging this. Rather we should unleash the creative minds of each individual property owner and let nature take its course.
There is an argument to be made that many of the newer residential areas of the city were, in effect, planned developments and should remain so and “protected”, which is how they would probably have developed naturally anyway. I anticipate, however, that if the proposed “Opportunity District” is adopted for the selected area, we may wish to expand it later into other parts of the city that have been in steady decline. That is for the future.
For now, the “Opportunity District” (or, if you like, “O-Zone”) would allow any use within its bounds that is permitted in any of the other enumerated districts. Shops would spring up where the traffic demanded it. Service providers would establish themselves near their base of support. Even wealthy industrialists would be allowed, if they chose, to build their mansions near their factories, as they did in the old days. If a two family house were destroyed, it could be replaced by a convenience store if such were convenient. In other words, imagination would not be restricted by outdated codes or needless government interference.
Having seen years of a stagnant or even declining tax base, particularly in this area, the worst thing that could be said for this proposal is that it couldn’t hurt, and it has the potential to help a great deal.
These are my initial thoughts. I look forward to a wide-open discussion.
Buy my murder mystery The Evil Has Landed
and don't forget The Judge Report (THE BOOK) is now available, too!
|
Forget the opportunity zones. Let "downtown" be annexed to the Baseball Hall of Fame to house the brand-spankin'-new JAMES EDWARD RICE wing!
![[User Picture Icon]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/27459829/6191726) |
| From: | ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) rgoing |
|---|
| Date: |
January 12th, 2009 08:53 pm (UTC) |
|---|
|
|
|
|
(Link) |
|
WOOHOOO!!!!!!!!
|