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.
This is not my comment, but I share this sentiment & feel like leaving up piles of "art" in a natural environment is a bit off putting.
"I am an avid stone balancer. I teach classes on the art form and give presentations on it regularly. I published the first widely available guide book on rock and stone balancing. I love this art form and want to see it grow.
However, I am very concerned about the practice of leaving stacks of stones littering natural areas. There is a large worldwide community of stone balance artists who share this concern, and who practice a leave-no-trace approach in creating our temporary art. We build our balances, take some photos, and then dismantle. We strive especially to avoid disturbing natural and protected areas"
I might suggest that the artist consider that the people knocking over his works are not necessarily troublemakers. They might just prefer the waterfront left in its natural state.
If, as stated in this article "Coalition members argue that it's possible to make Burlington a more densely populated city by constructing three- to six-story mid-rise buildings on parcels that today languish as parking lots or function as gas stations or single-story retail establishments." Then why did the Coalition oppose any new housing development in the South End? There are plenty of single story retail establishments that have been redeveloped in the South End in recent years, all of which could have been multi story mixed use, but due to the continued protests from the CLC and others, there is no new housing allowed in the enterprise zone.
If the CLC supports three- to six-story mid-rise buildings, why all the opposition to the BC redevelopment, which fits right into that mixed use sweet spot?
CLC members consistently say they aren't against density or development, but then oppose any project that arises where density changes or development happens. You can't have it both ways...
When are people going to figure out that Burlington has a town line? The town can't grow bigger without infill & rezoning, so developers will just keep building outside Burlington which will create more problems with traffic & parking for the people who live here. If you don't want the southern connector, the best way to reduce that traffic is to build more housing in town so people don't have to drive everywhere.
"The city should instead beef up its affordable housing regulations so new units built in other parts of Burlington are not overpriced." - Sure, so the solution is to build it somewhere else, just not in your neighborhood? Classic NIMBY. Where exactly in town are people not opposed to new development right now?
Meanwhile, Essex, SoBurl, Winooski, Williston and every town around Burlington will continue to grow. Since there is zero new housing supply, prices here will continue to go up, and more people will move out of town. Density and development are not bad words, if done properly.
Anybody who says Burlington doesn't need to construct more housing has obviously never tried to buy a house in Burlington, or has owned one long enough already that they got in ahead of the crunch. People who work here want to live in town with their families, as evidenced by the increase in home prices and lack of inventory. If people can't buy here, and nothing is being built, people will continue to move out to surrounding towns where sprawl is impacting our state in ways that are totally unsustainable. All these people then need to drive into and out of the city every day, meaning more traffic, parking needs, pollution and projects like the Champlain Parkway. Sprawl will do more damage to VT than could ever be done on the parcel of land at the center of this debate.
Burlingtonians are totally fine with development outside the city, because they don't see it and it isn't their problem. The resistance to the housing plan and a piece of private land being developed by a private developer is NIMBYism at its finest. Anywhere else, the developer would have gone ahead and built whatever they wanted on that land, with no public input. Here, people are given the opportunity to participate in the process, and they still complain about it.
Density and development are not bad words. Cities all over the world figured that out, and hopefully Burlington does too, otherwise our downtown will turn into a giant parking lot and our roads will be clogged with commuters. With the right density and development, people could live close enough to work that we might finally get a functioning transit system and a decent network of bike lanes that would make our city a lot more livable than it is today.