--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com,
"justifiedright"
<justifiedright@...> wrote:
>
>
Werner, you are pretty good at setting up straw men and knocking
> them
down. You said:
>
> "That Duany was the primary source of creating
our Redevelopment
> Plan is still being cited as a good reason to accept
it without
> question."
>
He may have been talking about Fred
and others.
> The contract gives rights to the plan, so the plan goes
nowhere
> without the rights holder. Accordingly, the Plan was held up in
> bankruptcy along with the contract. By asserting that the "Plan"
> was not also held up in Bankruptcy is to suggest then that the
City
> could have gone ahead with it. Does that make you understand yet
> how wrong you are about this stuff? The Plan was as held up as
the
> Contract.
I think you miss (once again) the nuance of what
Werner is saying.
The Plan is the only lawful use of the land. A contract
can't
dictate the use of the land contrary to what the lawful use is. That
is the cart before the horse. Chnage the plan and then you can make
a
contract in congruence with it. Werner is correct in his statement
that what
was done ws zoning by contract. Land use/planning is
supposed to be
independent of contracts. The city Plans the land use
and then seeks
contracts for other to use the land in accordance
therewith. Anything else
is illegal (spot) zoning.
>
> Here is a point from you that
really defines our differences:
>
> "All of that diverts attention
from the most significant issue,
Land
> Use. It's all about Planning,
Zoning and Land Use."
>
> You see prior land use and zoning laws
like some holy script that
> must never change. I believe it must be
flexible to change with
> changing times. Again, a historian does not
have to fear
progress.
> I don't care when land use and zoning laws
change to make us
> better. You believe those laws are more important
than progress,
to
> proectect some thought in your head that somehow
it makes you more
> respectful of history. In reality, it enslaves you to
history.
>
Off the mark again. Change the plan first. Planning is
supposed to
flow out of what is best for the city in terms of planning, not
the
economic returns of a private individual (contract). If we left it
to some we'd have nothing but monster truck race tracks.
