We must reject the
Ronald Reagan
|
May 2008 VOLUME 25 NUMBER 5
|
|
|
PENINSULA VILLAGE COUNCIL
Village Hall hours are 8:00 am to 4:30 pm daily except holidays and weekends.
|
|
|
BOSTON TOWNSHIP |
|
|
VALLEY FIRE BOARD |
|
|
MEMORIAL DAY FLAGS |
|
|
AROUND THE COMMUNITY
|
|
|
NEW POSTMASTER
|
|
|
GET WELL WISHES |
|
|
WEDDING ANNOUNCEMENT |
|
|
NEW ARRIVAL |
|
|
CONGRATULATIONS PAUL |
|
|
To the Editors:
|
|
|
To the Editors:
Now just in case you think there’s a chance that your opinion, no matter what it is, might still matter, get a load of this: ignoring the consensus and input of professionals and Peninsula residents, the hard work of other members of the Planning Commission, the Solicitor and even Council, they decided they’d like to throw out the current Zoning Ordinance that they themselves adopted in 2005. While certainly not perfect, this ordinance has and is being thoroughly reviewed, and steadily improved since its passage. It was referred to as “state of the art” by Kirby Date, AICP, of the Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, and as “complicated” by Councilman Schneider. Now, I love my 1995 automobile, but it’s needing more repairs and patches all the time, and I can’t be certain that it will still get me to where I want to go tomorrow. The interesting thing about the 1991 code is that it does contain the 2-acre lot requirement. Other than that, I really don’t know what. The Commission, all of us volunteers by the way, will have a minimum of 30 days to review it and provide our recommendation. So, please, do come to any of the Village Council’s (usually the second Monday at 7 p.m.) and the Planning Commission’s (usually the first Tuesday at 7 p.m.) meetings. Make your opinion count. I hope to see you there, especially June 9, 6:30 p.m.
|
|
|
ANNUAL CHICKEN BARBECUE |
|
|
To the Editors:
Bob's idea of a "viewshed" is appropriate when preserving a view for the greater good, such as limiting the encroachment of civilization on an historic site for the enjoyment of the public. Restricting cell phone towers at the edge of the Gettysburg battlefield is an example. But Bob wants to grant this right to individuals who don't want to see any changes on private property they don't own, but can see from their property. We live in a community, not a wilderness, in the midst of a large protected area created by eminent domain. That process required some compensation to the landowners. With our zoning restrictions, the greater good to the entire community is the only possible compensation, so it must make sense. That greater good is clear when the restrictions are applied to situations that impact the entire community, like housing developments built on large tracts of land like the Bender property. The greater good is less clear when applied to an occasional house built on a lot of similar size to the vast majority of its neighbors, such as on the rest of Stine Road. As any restrictions are proposed, backers should understand that they are asking others to shoulder the cost of beliefs they may not have. And property owners are owed an accurate accounting of the impact of the restrictions on their property. After all, one man’s viewshed is another man’s backyard.
|
|
|
To the Editors:
These requirements are sometimes misunderstood since Peninsula often goes beyond these bare essentials. Public comment is consistently sought before meetings, and chairs often allow additional comment even during deliberations. That may be why Bob was misled into believing he could demand that individual Council members account to him for their personal thought processes. Unfortunately, there have been times when even the basic rules were not followed. In developing the 2005 ordinance, the prior Planning Commission gave no specific notice as to what changes were being discussed, not even for their frequent special meetings. No votes were taken on individual sections for review in the minutes. Anyone wishing to understand the changes proposed and discussed would have had to attend all 22 meetings. Even when Planning presented these extensive changes to Council, individual sections were not discussed. Planning instead promised immediate review to correct its acknowledged flaws -- that the ordinance was not clearly written; that it revamped and confused the duties of our government bodies; that there were no forms or procedures in place to implement the changes. Since then, Planning has rejected calls for a specific timetable of review. They cancelled a public comparison with the old ordinance that had been unanimously approved the previous month. Most members never attended subsequent zoning board hearings to see how difficult their language was to implement. In 3 years of review, only a few provisions have been addressed. The new members now voice their understandable resentment of extra meetings and work to understand both ordinances. Council seems not out of control as Bob contends, just out of patience. I do not know what our zoning should be -- except to be clear, with objective standards, personnel to implement them, and community support to enforce them. I am grateful for the work of our elected and appointed volunteers who are trying to get us there. I say “volunteers” even for Council, whose members are paid only a pittance. We could help their work by understanding the issues, and not just allowing others to inflame our passions. Pam Burda will email you notices, agendas, draft and approved minutes if you request her to at peninsulavil@windstream.net. Or pick up the old and new codes from her. Read them for an understanding of specific provisions. It may be the only way that we can come to some reasonable restrictions that are both clear and enforceable, and stop all this demonizing of personal motivations.
|
|
|
A BIG THANK YOU!
|
|
|
To the Editors:
Council sent this issue to the Planning Commission (PC) in late summer 2007. PC considered this issue for about 6 months. During this process, the PC requested clarification of the area to be changed. This was never clearly articulated by council and when the public asked why the council wants the change, the public was told “we don’t need to give you a reason”. PC held a well attended public hearing. After the hearing; consideration of the Long Range Plan; and the affect on property owners, the PC rejected the proposed change. FACT: If you have a minimum of 2 acre parcel that was present at the time of the change in zoning in 2000, you can build a single family dwelling. (Source: Article VI. Sec 06.01 Nonconforming lots of record) The Village does have large parcels that can be potentially developed. The Zoning Ordinance needs large parcel development language, not a change in our minimum acreage. Village Council has had two official public readings on the proposed change and will vote June 9, 2008. No one should speak for you. Make your voices heard at the village Council Public hearing on this issue.
|
|
|
TOTAL BODY FITNESS `FOR A BETTER YOU`
Total Body Fitness "For A Better You" is located at 6138 Riverview Rd. on the corner of Riverview and 303 in the gray building on the 3rd. Fl. Look for our sign out in front. Come in and see everything we have to offer to become a "Better You" in 2008 and beyond! |
|
|
TOWPATH PRESCHOOL |
|
|
CONDOLENCES |
|
|
WANT ADS |
|
|
PENINSULA MIX |
|
|
SERVICES |