ad

18 Comments

  1. 1

    Chad B.

    No. N/A. N/A. N/A. No.

  2. 2

    Lynn

    Nope! We do not need to give the “let’s make Brookhaven Buckhead” crowd any more power!

  3. 3

    Susan

    Thank you Brookhaven Yes, thank you.

  4. 4

    Brian S.

    No DRB, get the Overlay re-write and the zoning re-write done. The greatest damage has already been done with the Connolly project approval. Finish what was started that will really matter, stop dragging your feet, wasting money, and the staffs time.

  5. 5

    Howard

    No on the DRB! We do not need another layer of regulations that stifle property owners rights. If codes are written properly and followed there is no need for a DRB.

  6. 6

    Randy Watson

    Even if there is interest, I suspect there will be a ‘why bother’ element to this, right? I mean, if we had citizens galore show up the other week voicing strong and united opposition, only to be overruled by their so-called elected ‘representatives’ (Park, Gebbia, Jone$ and Matti$on, etc.) then where is there any assurance that a DRB’s opinion will be considered or have any true input?

    I suspect there is some sleight of hand going on…..

  7. 7

    Eddie E.

    No DRB.
    Properly address all concerns in the Code with as strong enforcement as possible.
    No additional permanent staff involvement is necessary.

  8. 8

    Easy Rider

    A community DRB is a great idea. Enforce city codes, but give the DRB discretion to decline intervention or basically pick or choose projects they want to be involved with. A DRB would have been great idea to address the Connolly project. Instead of multiple meetings with diverse opinions the DRB could have condensed the arguments to key issues. The DRB could then act as a conduit to the developer and the city. There is plenty of gray area in city codes which can’t all be addressed in rewrite so having a DRB as fallback only helps the community.

  9. 9

    Levi

    No DRB, overlay and zoning re-write needs to be done NOW. Consistency in reviews and implementation for all. No internal policies! Strict enforcement! Error on the side of the citizens! Stop waiting on any rumored applications coming in that can be grandfathered or given favor. Get er done!

  10. 10

    Heather

    I disagree with giving anyone- or the mob- too much power.

    We’ve literally had people in our neighborhood association tell us they hope our house burns down.

    If you you give free reign to the community there will be people in front of our (and likely others) house within the month with bulldozers.

  11. 11

    Easy Rider

    Sounds good, but the reality is the city has been trying to rewrite the code for a couple of years and it may take a couple years to complete it. Even after it is rewritten there will often be grey area that is not covered in the code. So we can have a DRB as a fallback for the citizens or we can have 50 meetings and still be ineffective.

  12. 12

    Kathy

    I hear you Levi. It just increases the lack of trust this city has for the Mayor and Council. The zoning re-write was funded back in 6/2015 and the Overlay was approved to get started in 8/2016. Can’t help but think that there are other motivating factors in play to stall the process at the cost and detriment of the citizens.

  13. 13

    Bob Sorrentino

    How would the DRB have any more power than the actual city council to clarify the code during a zoning case (the only ones who can legally change the zoning map or text). How would the DRB be a better/more effective conduit to the applicant than an elected council person in contact with their constituents? What expertise would they provide that the professional staff and PC do not already provide? What you describe is basically the PC but with more of a dialogue with an applicant in a effort to communicate the code (which is the staff’s job). I am not seeing where a hole gets filled here, and at the cost of another layer between the ultimate vote and the citizens.

  14. 14

    Mr. Conciousness

    Dear Bob, The Bobber, Bobsky, the Bobarino. Hello. Gunga galunga.

    Do not try to make sense of this. You must attend and pay attention to a new layer of Government. This is an attempt to further complicate and confuse. Imagine another meeting. Another Board.

    This is another step in creating a GIANT Brookhaven Homeowners Association.

    So, I’m on the first tee with the Dali Lama. I give him the driver. He hauls off and whacks one – big hitter, the Lama – long, into a ten-thousand foot crevasse, right at the base of this glacier.

    Do you know what the Lama says? Gunga galunga… gunga, gunga-lagunga.

    So we finish the eighteenth and he’s gonna stiff me. And I say, “Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know.” And he says, “Oh, uh, there won’t be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.” So I got that goin’ for me, which is nice.

  15. 15

    ??????????????

    ??????????????????????????????

  16. 16

    Molly

    This could be an entirely different conversation if detailed elevations were being required for review and to be adhered to but since that is not the case, what is the point?

  17. 17

    Eddie E.

    A foolish idea that must be (to quote Don Knotts) ‘nipped in the bud’ lest it turn into a long-term, recurring expense.

  18. 18

    Guest

    This is a classic Trojan Horse. We go ahead and create another new board that weilds indeterminate power over city design and zoning, made up of precisely the same people that brought us the high density nightmare on Dresden. They tell us that the DRB could help us by negotiating FOR us in zonings. Don’t be fooled. We don’t need a DRB speaking for us while actively working against us behind the scenes. Write your concilmembers and the planning commission to oppose this immediately.

Comments are closed.