CC_Minutes_2007_0813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

+ Y~\a. a1V ~~~ V VVlvaaa µ va~~ Va. 1 44a 11V11VV1 11VJJ Lµ1~V1141 l lll/LL,'~ J411Lr 4/ > to save it on my hard drive. > Best regards. > Al Sands > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Roe < . - <±> > To. > Sent: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 6:57 pm > Subject: RE: Howt o Govern a City --St. Paul Pioneer Press Editorial Friday, > June 2 7 > Business Park is part of the 2001 comp plan change that you hold up as > sacrosanct.? Probably no loss of use claim if the comp plan designation is > already in effect for years before a development.? B6 and PUD gives developers > (and the city) options to come up with plans that don't fit more narrow zoning > designations - why is that "central planning" and not freedom?? The?whole thing > has to be approved in the open via the elected officials of the city.??I think > it is possible for a "grand scheme" to allow freedom -- apparently the Friends > of Twin Lakes don't.? Seems like you are arguing against the 2001 Master Plan > that you are also saying we are not even following in relation to the AUAR.? > Which planet is?it that allows you to?own both sides of?the argument, > and?everybody else to own neither?? > ? > Freedom:? How about letting Dan Commers build a big box on his land?? (Not that > I am advocating that - but I think Greenhut is.)? The whole opposition to Twin > Lakes was to restrict a market-driven business activity (big box retail).? How > is that not working in opposition to the freedom that Greenhut describes? > ? > We agree on your last point.? EXCEPT that I do not PRESUME corruption in EVERY > case, as you seem to do. > ? > Dan Roe > Email da '- ~r c;~ . t.F~r. > ? > ? > ? > ? > -----Original Message----- . ~ ( .. ,, ,..._. . > From. .._ ...~~_~ ,=.c~~r._ ._ -i_~ :._. w n__ -_] > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 5:07 PM > 5ubject: Re: Howt o Govern a City --St. Paul Pioneer Press Editorial Friday, 1 LL~G 1 V Vl LL http://webmail.aol.com/29047/aoUen-us/MaiUPrintMessage.aspx 8/7/2007