sell your ride
post your service
sell your stuff
post your class
browse all jobs
post a job
homes for sale
for sale by owner
post your listing
If you're looking for "I Spys," dating or LTRs, this is your scene.
If you're looking for full-on kink or group play, you'll get what you need here.
Many of us have explained, convincingly, at many Ward meetings, why new housing should not be built in the Enterprise District. Ms. Shannon says we were a distraction? Please. A very vocal majority is opposed, for good reason. The Council opposes putting housing in "at least for now"? Sure, why don't they wait until we're all dead. Then everyone will have forgotten us, and our objections.
This is great! The dislikers have arrived. Welcome. Any of your own views to voice???
Dear Mr. Mayor;
You say the Plan was designed as a community conversation, but many in the community feel that your aim is to mollify resistance. City Planning gives the city an ability to protect what is loved in the South End “during a time of growth and change”. Many feel that change should be limited, and that the key to protecting what is loved about the neighborhood lies in leaving it alone rather than giving it many new (and expensive) projects. There will always be a housing shortage in Burlington – a friend’s father remembers it as early as 1946. But it’s a desirable place to live because of the way it is.
To protect the uses that give the neighborhood “so much life,” you must avoid doing anything which kills that life. In one sentence you say the plan “re-envisions the abandoned and contaminated Barge Canal as a large, accessible open space”. Some feel that Nature has not abandoned the site, nor left it vacant. And if it’s contaminated, it seems dangerous to make it accessible.
Several years back, the City organized a campaign to keep college students from parking on lawns, since the Greenspace is badly needed for our Watershed. If that is true, doesn’t it make sense to leave these few remaining tracts of forested wilderness on Pine Street the way they are? I can understand building on the parking lot sites, but not in the dwindling Natural areas. It would be nice to see a long-term transformation that favored Nature over development.
James, I sure hope you're right. Ever read about Robert Moses, and the effect of his highways on NYC?
I assume we're planning to channel traffic onto Pine Street that might otherwise take a different route? I wonder if you'll find anyone with a business or residence on Pine Street who supports this. It's already, as Herman's Hermits sang, "a must to avoid." "Rush hour" will make time stand still. I picture a line of cars represented by that dotted line.
Trees can get diseases. So can people. Sure, a tree could fall and damage something, but guess what - no matter what the city does, some tree will fall and damage something someday anyway. And, some tree that might catch a disease will not catch that disease. Sure, death is only a question of "when". Life is a liability. But I still think a parking lot is (in the long run) a liability - it erases nature. As for Randolph - it's not the only bad idea they are considering down there. They plan to "drop" hundreds of ash trees? I'll bet anything they've signed with a tree service already, and I'll bet they run out of money before they plant those tiny new trees. Maybe I'm cynical - but so is the person who decided those trees should go before there were/are any problems with them.
Thank you for the article - many people do not know what the real estate planners have in mind for this lovely city. There should be no housing in the area of Enterprise. There should continue to be blocks of trees. That is not underutilized space - it allows people to be close to Nature. I'd settle for a well-designed building on the Blodgett site. Do not build any condos at the waterfront. Do not build highrise buildings downtown. Do not ruin what makes this city a good place to live. In ten years, all the consultants and Planners will be GONE, working on another project, and we'll be stuck with their "accomplishments". No more urban renewal, please. The folks who will be able to rent or buy the new apartments (the 80 or 90% which are not "affordable") can afford to drive in from the suburbs, as they do now.
All Comments »