Here in our two cities of the Eastern Shore, we started 2006 much like we ended 2005. Daphne is focused on tall and Fairhope, on sprawl.
As is our tradition (done it this way twice before) let’s first look at Daphne. The opening meeting of the city council in 2006 did what Council President Greg Burnam said wasn’t going to happen. They extended the moratorium on high-rise construction. Vocal residents critical of both the buildings and the process used to authorize them, are causing some of the members to avoid closure.
This delay gives time for the anti-forces to attempt once more to rally the unconcerned citizens of the city to their cause. Council member Cathy Barnette has decided the reason more opposition has not been evident at planning commission and city council meetings is that the citizenry is on the whole either (1) too busy to attend the meetings, (2) too shy to speak out, or (3) both.
Perhaps I lack adequate sensitivity, but at recent meetings of both the council and planning commission, I thought there were lots of speakers and they were not too shy to state their positions on any and everything.
Anyhow, Barnette’s fix is a survey form asking what limits you’d place on buildings in the high-rise zone: 50 feet? 50-100?,…200 or more? These questionnaires are being distributed by anyone who wants to pass them out and completed by pretty much anyone who gets their hands on a form and can put down a Daphne address. Not too controlled and certainly open to bias, as has been noted by several of her fellow council members.
When validated by e-mail, adding bias by disenfranchising those who don’t have e-mail access, they will be used as public input at the hearing on high-rises.
In other business, Pfil Hunt of Gardnyr Michael Capital provided a progress report on financing the new cooperative retail district (tenants are signing up — bond interest rate should be set soon). He also suggested re-financing some current city bonds at a more favorable rate under the provisions of just-enacted hurricane recovery legislation. Federal money appropriated for Alabama is limited to $1.2 million and it will likely be a first-come, first-served situation.
While this appeared to be new news to everybody on the city side, Hunt’s heads-up could get Daphne near the front of the line for Federal funds. If successful, they could save as much as $600,000 over the life of the bonds. Many points for Gardnyr Michael — kudos from a majority of the council. And as a show of appreciation, a brief attempt to short-circuit the services procurement process of the city to keep them on without competitive bidding.
The next hot topic was the Battle of Spanish Fort. This is not the fight between Daphne and their neighbor to the north over the big new shopping mall. Not even close — the battle the council was asked to consider was 200 years ago.
Mrs. Shawn Holland of Spanish Fort asked that the Daphne city council join with other Baldwin County governmental bodies to place a memorial plaque at the site of the battle on this its 200th anniversary. She says the site is the high ground north of I-10, approximately where the scenic overlook in Spanish Fort is today. Then it got serious.
Was the battle really there, or was it as council member John Lake maintains, actually at Village Point in Daphne? Mrs. Holland countered with contemporary writings by both Spanish and British commanders (Mobile was Spanish then, Pensacola, British) and a touch of military strategy: the decisive battle was at the fort and it was on a tactically significant vantage point — not at some boggy lowland spot on the water. Council member Gus Palumbo sagely noted that there is a lot of history, but a lot of folklore, too. Resolution came with a call for a work session. And on that historical note, we pay farewell to Daphne for now.
In Fairhope, the year opened with a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting — council meets a week later. Our déjà vu event is the Song Grove development approval. Or re-approval, as the planners had approved and sent it to the council for its approval once already.
After neighbors of the development alleged violations of open meetings laws and failure to follow established procedures in the approval process, the council sent it back for review. The plaintiffs had a much friendlier and concerned audience in the council than they found at this meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission chairman, Dick Charles, opening discussion by expressing his dismay, anger and resentment (not necessarily in that order, but cycling through these emotions during his “venting”).
He said he had followed every rule and had responded to neighbors’ concerns by scheduling a public hearing, even though public comments are only required on re-zoning requests — and this was NOT re-zoning. Those complaining had failed to take advantage of the opportunity. One property owner, Tom DuPre’, stated that he had not been notified; however, the clerk countered with a record of certified letters having been sent to all property owners, including DuPre’. Nothing got any better for the protesting neighbors and the commission reaffirmed its approval and moved on to other business. (Just in case you have lost track of the original issue in all this, let me help: Drainage.)
The other business, included hearings and reviews for various projects in and around Fairhope, including Fairhope Falls, a proposed 604 lot subdivision, way east of the city on Highway 104, but not too far from the proposed location of a new Wal-Mart. Coincidence, coordination or conspiracy? Keep reading Lagniappe to learn more about Fairhope’s growing pains.
Contact Pete Gleszer at jubilee@lagniappemobile.com.
Archives
Jubilee
