Before I get accused of being picky, mean, intimidating, etc. Let me start off with some well deserved applause.
Thank you Council Member Michael Barber. Your actions tonight relating to the moped (helmet) law that has been long delayed, may contribute to saving a life. This is something that was approved back on December 2nd 2008 with the intention of starting it January 1, 2009. Well, the ball kept getting dropped but Mr. Barber simply kept picking it up, finally doing the work required to get it finalized himself. He came prepared with all the documents and information Council needed to vote on a slight modification (one which he noted required helmets be worn on the head .... a bit of a slip in the first ordinance version that would have allowed someone to be within the letter of the law by wearing the helmet on an elbow, etc.)
Mr. Barber proposed a Feb. 1, 2009 start date for the new ordinance. It was verified that with the Feb. 1, 2009 start date, Christiansburg Police would give a warning to first time violaters of the new law. Further violations by that (those) individuals would result in tickets. This served to prevent yet another postponement when Council members Wade and Vanhoozier thought it would better to wait and give people plenty of warning (proposing a March date for activation). Fortunately, when it came to a vote, Mr. Barber found support for the ordinance in Council members Ann Carter and Henry Showalter. The ordinance requiring face/eye protection as well as helmets, will go into effect on Feb. 1, 2009.
As a former paramedic who has seen the damage that can occur when these basic safety guidelines are not implemented and enforced, I am grateful to Mr. Barber, Ms. Carter, and Mr. Showalter for there clear dedication to the safety and well-being of citizens. When accidents occur, it is not only the rider of the moped that is affected. Regardless of how accidental, for the person driving a vehicle that strikes one of these and causes long-term damage or death to another person, the psychological scars can last a lifetime.
Mr. Barber also requested a committee be formed to establish guidelines for which the use of the money the Town plans to pull back from its agreement with the TDC for use concerning tourism activities. Mr. Barber proposed a committee of council members, aquatic center director, parks and recreation director, and others would be helpful in plans for how to use that money. The Mayor adamantly refused to establish such a committee feeling that existing committees were adequate to meet any needs. Once again, the Mayor has exerted his authority to prevent knowledgeable people to participate in pre-planning how Town revenues will be spent. Sadly, this also sends a strong message to citizens that citizen input is not wanted by the Mayor. It seems the Mayor would prefer to 'wing it', 'make it up as he goes' when it comes to spending our money.
Now to the growly part:)
The audio of this meeting is already up on the webpage:
http://historiccambria.com/Public%20Documents/audio%20files.htmThe video of it will be up as soon as I can get it ready. Sorry, it takes a fair bit of time to load, convert, then upload.
Several citizens voiced their
concerns over a conditional use permit on Walter's Drive at a joint public hearing. I would strongly recommend that if you can find some time, watch the video. In particular, the response the proponent of the development had to the concerns citizens had issued relating to traffic. This is in the same area where citizens recently raised issues with the Town Council about a builder who has done little to nothing in the area but has maintained what those citizens deem to be eyesores of stored construction materials. During that discussion, the Town Manager informed council that all the builder had to do was to hammer in one nail in order to keep permits active. In Part 1 of the 2007
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code - Effective May 1, 2008 you will find:
110.6 Abandonment of work. A building official shall be permitted to revoke a permit if work on the site authorized by the permit is not commenced within six months after issuance of the permit, or if the authorized work on the site is suspended or abandoned for a period of six months after the permit is issued; however, permits issued for plumbing, electrical and mechanical work shall not be revoked if the building permit is still in effect. It shall be the responsibility of the permit applicant to prove to the building official that authorized work includes substantive progress, characterized by approved inspections as specified in Section 113.3 of at least one inspection within a period of six months or other evidence that would indicate substantial work has been performed. Upon written request, the building official may grant one or more extensions of time, not to exceed one year per extension.
One citizen from the audience came forward to encourage the Town Council to move quickly on the Aquatic Center contract with Tech. I would simply advise Council it might be a good idea to "make sure there's water in the pool before they dive off that platform". Moving with all due DELIBERATE speed is sometimes more effective in the long run than 'jumping in' too quickly and not taking the time to know EXACTLY what you are getting in to.
Re: previous paragrph: Where this ties into another issue is specifically that reference using the phrase substantial work has been performed. In Mr. Terpenny's statement it appears he considers substantial work to be the 'hammering of one nail'. Mr. Terpenny's assertions to Council as to the County's level of commitment to the appearance of the new Courthouse and Parking Garage was based on the phrasing that was used in the Permit - 'substantial compliance'. Guess we know how he defines that:) I have no doubt that the County will NOT make that same determination so we won't end up with a teacup containing a geranium as the 'landscaping' required.
Again, my personal thanks to Mr. Barber, Ms. Carter, and Mr. Showalter for putting the welfare of citizens FIRST!!!