On September 20th, I posted on a Planning Commission meeting from five days’ time earlier. In that post, I mentioned of City Manager Brunner that
What’s pandering though, both intellectually and practically, is the suggestion that if the Tratt Street neighborhood becomes higher density, then as matter of balance other neighborhoods should be enforced to lower density.
Practically, this administration will be unlikely to enforce zoning requirements elsewhere in the city effectively. It’s just an attempt to placate a few angry people. This administration has had little appreciable success anywhere in the city with enforcement — it’s been an over and under-enforcement problem. (See, Whitewater Common Council Meeting for 9/2: Student Housing (Part 1).)
Intellectually, even if it’s true that the housing imbalance between single family and multi-dwelling units is the biggest problem in the city, the administration cannot redress that imbalance appreciably through zoning restrictions elsewhere in the city.
Only additional single-family homes, perhaps on the periphery of the city, will appreciably shift the proportional balance (one that is now in favor of apartments).
This administration has only encouraged the expectation that ‘tit for tat’ trades between R1 and R3 might be possible. The wages of this encouragement (appeasement, really) — frustration, complaints, debates that waste time better used on truly important matters.
There’s no leadership in this approach. It’s as though an edgy person insisted that nothing is more useful in securing one’s prosperity than a rabbit’s foot, and the administration promised a study of rabbits’ feet, and suggested using a few around town to promote good luck.
That’s nothing but an encouragement to foolishness. A sensible leader would say: Well, I know that you feel it’s important to have a rabbit’s foot, but we see no benefit to the city in it, and so we’ll not be purchasing in bulk, thanks very much for asking.
Countless other people will now have to deal with this issue, again and again, from constituents whose hopes have been raised, but are sure to be dashed, when the idea of swapping R1 and R3 properties proves impossible.