Zoning Update

There was another meeting last night on the new zoning code. I was unable to attend, or even observe, due to other commitments. Thus, the following is based solely on the Tribune article and should not therefore necessarily be deemed reliable.

My favorite exchange is this one:

"The view is part of the value of a home," said Sharon Kiffe. "I don't see how a height restriction will stifle growth. City rules should be enforced for the good of all citizens."
Let's think about this one. The view is "part of the value of a home," huh? So if I buy a lot on a hill that allows me to see the Highwood Mountains, from that moment forward all property between my eyes and those mountains is somehow frozen in time and development such that no one can ever build anything (or grow anything) that obstructs my view? Is that really what you buy? I don't think so.

Then, City Commission candidate Stuart "Lewin also suggested that the mayor consider recusing himself from the final vote on the code because of what he considers upgrades on some of the mayor's holdings." The article doesn't go any further about what "upgrades" there would be to the Mayor's land, but if, in fact, he would benefit from the Code, I tend to agree with Lewin.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I think the "upgrade" referred to a zone change that would allow another hotel, like the one Mayor Gray already owns along the riverfront (the La Quinta.) And yes, he should recuse himself. He should not profit from his position and insider knowledge. That seems very ethically unsound to me.