Comments on: CSD Administration Planning to Move Into New Beacon Hill Offices in May

By: No Suprise

No Suprise — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:00:51 +0000

And you are saying that I jacked this thread? 😉

By: Deanne

Deanne — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:15:50 +0000

Ack! Scott- reply’s below. (Or if this messes up too, well…maybe it’s a sign we should start again another day! :0)

By: Deanne

Deanne — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:13:35 +0000

Scott, could be that that’s what happened. I’m still curious to know how Fred got filled in. At any rate, what I do know is that with each bit of confusion, while it may seem perfectly normal to the City staff handling it and to the Commissioners who get updates, it’s starting to add to an increasing feeling of uneasiness for some of us residents.

By: Deanne

Deanne — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:07:32 +0000

Geoff, you know that I always root for folks when I see them trying hard to turn something around. Based on the meetings I’ve attended and the public engagement process that the Commissioners expect from developers, I feel they’re on their way to getting things re-tracked. The County is well aware that its entire system needs overhauling, and is working on that now. Take part where you can to help get things to where they should be. We’re all DeKalb residents, so why wouldn’t we want to see them succeed?

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:02:30 +0000

Actually I don’t have certainty, Deanne, which is why I was asking. In case you did. As I understand it, there was the issue of whether or not the city properly applied the zoning regs in their review and approval of the project, which was raised by the neighbors and then resolved in the city’s favor through a ruling by the ZBA. But then there was a suit brought by the Gannons against, I thought, the developer, which was filed in DeKalb Court and then settled before it went to trial. Maybe that’s where the confusion arises?

By: Deanne

Deanne — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 22:56:51 +0000

Scott, that’s how it came across to me. You may recall that Fred Boykin got scolded on here for violating the confidentiality agreement having to do with that settlement. During a City Meeting around that same time, the Mayor referenced a closed executive session to settle a legal matter. Could be that it was an entirely separate legal issue, but then I’m not sure what would explain why Fred as a commissioner would have been privy to the details of the confidential settlement if it was just between the two private parties. Also, back during the neighbors’ ZBA hearing on it, Mark Gannon laid out definite concerns regarding the handling of the bank drive-thru. Two ZBA members cited those same concerns when voting in the neighbors’ favor. Seems odd to me that Mark Gannon would just up and drop that– not saying he didn’t since obviously I don’t know. Since you seem to be pretty certain that the City wasn’t involved in the suit (and I’m guessing that you’d say so if you thought the City had had further private discussions with either party), perhaps you can help clear up how Fred may have learned of the details and what led to the drive-thru thing becoming a a non-issue?

By: Geoff

Geoff — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:58:47 +0000

Deanne – I have no problems with public input into important community decisions. In fact, like you, I value it. I just don’t agree with you that there is some movement afoot to tamp it down for some reason. We have more opportunities to be heard in this community than in most. At some point you have to stop taking input and let the private sector do its thing – otherwise no development will happen.

You tout the County’s community input process into development, but I ask you: how much quality development has actually been put on the ground in the county? Whose growth is smarter? Who wins awards for downtown development – the city or the county? I’m not saying this to cheer lead anyone in particular, it’s just obvious that there are processes that work and processes that don’t work, and the proof is what gets put on the ground.