Archive for August 6th, 2006
There has been a lot of talk recently about developing urban design plans for our region. Recently a large number of community activists met with developers and City Hall officials at the Saturn Club to discuss formulating an agenda for growth. Also, Chuck Banas and Chris Hawley, of the New Millennium Group, gave a tour of the city to Nathan Norris and Chad Emerson of PlaceMakers, LLC.
There is no question that bad development decisions have been made in the City of Buffalo. I do question if the creation of more regulations is the answer. Regulations have a tendency to stifle economic growth and discourage private investment. It is the lack of private investment, due to a hostile business climate, that has led to the decay of our urban area. It would seem to me that a much simpler solution is preferable. That solution would be the elimination of all the anti-business ordinances combined with a streamlined building permit process. Lowering taxes is also vital. This will only be accomplished with a reduction in the size and scope of government.
My fear is that the SmartCode is really a euphemism for Smart Growth, a set of codes and regulations with horrendous consequences. I do not want to see the “Portlandization” of Buffalo. The following excerpt describes the results of Smart Growth in Portland, Oregon.
In recent years there has been no better example of the pernicious effects of the sustainable development and smart growth agendas than the city of Portland, Oregon. So bad are the effects of the smart-growth plan adopted by Portland, that in policy circles the term “Portlandization” has been coined as a shorthand reference for a set of policies that lead to increased housing costs, artificially inflated property values, lower rates of home ownership, and policy-induced sprawl beyond the reach of urban land use-regulations. While the New Urbanists in the Portland area did not lead the charge for Portland’s draconian smart-growth plan, smart-growth advocates did have them as allies, if not in their specific policies, at least in the goals to be realized. As often happens, smart-growth advocates were all too happy to co-opt the more legitimate and intellectually vigorous program of the Portland area’s New Urbanists for their ideological purposes.
(De Vous, Phillip W.. ” The New Urbanism—Can it Survive the Company it Keeps?.” Acton Institute for the study of Religion and Liberty 16 July 2003
http ://www.acton.org/ppolicy/comment/article.php?id=147.)
PlaceMakers acknowledges, in their literature, that their SmartCode incorporates the ideas of Smart Growth and New Urbanism. This type of planning amounts to social planning based on a “vision” that is neither deisred by nor beneficial to many people. They are predisposed to planning which is unfriendly to the automobile, often times trying to coerce the forced use of public transportation. The fact that plans are underway to reopen Main Street to cars illustrates the potential downfalls of this type of planning.
The politicians considering this type of urban planning need to do their homework and not blindly accept the recommendations of these planners. The Smart Growth people are in this business to make money. They draw up plans laden with slick words and phrases illustrated with drawings that look great. The reality is often far different.
Bill Online Easily, Fast & Free with PayPal. No Software Needed. Sign Up Now!
Surfing around the internet one can find a plethora of information supporting theories that the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by explosives. I, in the past, have read much of the material and conclude that there is simply too much evidence and coincidence to blindly accept the governments official version of what happened. Following are excepts from a CNN story appearing online today.
(AP) — Kevin Barrett believes the U.S. government might have destroyed the World Trade Center. Steven Jones is researching what he calls evidence that the twin towers were brought down by explosives detonated inside them, not by hijacked airliners.
These men aren’t uneducated junk scientists: Barrett will teach a class on Islam at the University of Wisconsin this fall, over the protests of more than 60 state legislators. Jones is a tenured physicist at Brigham Young University whose mainstream academic job has made him a hero to conspiracy theorists. . .
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a government agency, filed 10,000 pages of reports that found fires caused by the crashing planes were more than sufficient to collapse the buildings.
The scholars’ group rejects those conclusions. Their Web site contends the government has been dishonest.
It adds: the “World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions” and “the government not only permitted 9/11 to occur but may even have orchestrated these events to facilitate its political agenda.”
The standards and technology institute, and many mainstream scientists, won’t debate conspiracy theorists, saying they don’t want to lend them unwarranted credibility.
I can’t help but question what really happened in light of President Bush’s outright lies leading to the war in Iraq. There is no doubt this administration has an aggressive agenda regarding the Arab world. The question is - How far will they go to accomplish their goals? As far as I’m concerned, they have already gone to far and I wouldn’t put anything past Bush.
Netflix Delivers DVDs to your home. NO LATE FEES. Try for FREE!
A Buffalo News editorial today points out that the Power Authority earned $40 million more than anticipated during the first quarter of this year. That is $40 million coming out of the pockets of WNY residents and others. What does the News think of this? They are actually gushing with praise calling it a good job and the result of good management.
My first reaction is - please pass the crack pipe, maybe then I’ll see this in a different light! After realizing I wasn’t going to get a hit off their pipe I started to think about this a bit more seriously.
Here’s my take. A government created Public Authority, with virtually no oversight or accountability, now has $40 million more dollars of our money to play with. Enter the white knight, Brian Higgins. Now he has another opportunity to preach to the choir and try to get a pittance from that money allocated to WNY.
Brian Higgins is not what we need. We need politicians who will actually address the cause of the problem - the Power Authority. We don’t need politicians playing the shell game with our money to make themselves appear to be doing good in order to be re-elected.
There are two candidates that are running in the democratic primary who are advocating real reform in Albany. Tom Suozzi is running against Mr. “it’s either right or wrong” Spitzer in the gubernatorial race. Sean Patrick Maloney is running for State Attorney General. Public Authorities are one of Maloney’s prime targets.
My challenge now goes out to registered democrats. If you are happy with the status quo, sit home on Primary Day as 83% of you usually do. If you truly want needed change in Albany, get out and vote for these two guys.
