Despite Brad Stipes' virtual one-person campaign to make good use of funding available to the town to improve/add sidewalks, the damage was done. Once again, the "let's wait and see" attitude resulted in a last minute rush to get something processed. Unfortunately, in this instance, it was compounded by a misunderstanding of the dates on the application itself. Regardless, the Town had a lot of time (years) to get something together to take advantage of funding that was available for sidewalks. Had Council Member Stipes been able to get people on board earlier, it might have gotten through.
But, what does it take to get people to be on board. The Mayor clearly displayed a big part of the problem at the Feb. 2, 2010 Town Council Meeting. Two issues were raised by Council Members: 1) requiring sidewalks in residential areas and 2) addressing code issues concerning the amount of green space required by code. The Mayor is the one person who chooses what goes on the agenda and what items are discussed/voted on at the Town Council Meetings. If you have an issue that has not come up at meetings, that is the place to start asking why, the Mayor's office.
Both of these were referred to the Planning Commission for review, with a directive that the Planning Commission would give a recommendation in 3 months (hmmm...just in time for the election? or just after the election?)
In the second of these, it was clear that more research was required in order to develop a cohesive, enforceable code. However, in the first issue, sidewalks, 3 of the 5 Town Council members expressed that it was time to require sidewalks in developments. (The 3 strong supporters of this were Stipes, Showalter, and Barber. Only Stipes is up for re-election in May.) The Mayor's response? "It would raise the price of properties." Uh...Duh...Hello! Yes, it might increase the value of those properties where the sidewalks were located. It might make neighborhoods pedestrian friendly. It might provide a safe place for our older residents to get walking exercies or for children to go visit a neighbor without having to either cross other people's yards or walk in the street.It might increase the value of properties. In increasing property values, it might increase revenue for the town. A majority of the Council Members present clearly wanted this done. Rather than calling for a consenus to have the Town Manager/Town Attorney to start working on a code amendment, it was instead sent to the Planning Commission for review.
The Planning Commission, when discussing both of these issues will either be short one person in the discussion and voting as one member works in a field directly affected by the code change. (This is called Conflict of Interest in State Code.) Add this to the fact that the Town has not filled the existing Planning Commission vacancy and you have 5 people instead of the historical standard of 7 looking at what needs to be done in order to include these in code.
Any such changes in code will require a public hearing, but much of the groundwork will be laid during Planning Commission meetings which are held at times when few people can attend. If you are able to do so, I recommend that you keep an eye on the PC agendas on the towns website and try to make those meetings where these items are worked on. In listening to the discussions, you are likely to find that you have questions that need to be brought to Council members decisions. You do not have to wait for a public hearing to let your 'voice' be heard. You can call, write, email, or catch them on the walking trails by the Rec Center in the early morning hours or on the golf courses in the area. Heck! I've even cornered some of them in the local grocery stores (when they didn't see me first:) Just kidding!
The two important issues are: 1) should sidewalks be required in new residential developments? And, 2) should the Town go to the state code allowed maximum of 10% green space for developments (above 10% is allowed but the Town would be required to pay for it)? Another part of #2 is should that code make it clear that those retention ponds and other UNUSABLE areas of the property should NOT be allowed to count as green space. Green space is where you children should have space to play or where communities could set up picnic areas. It should not be a mosquito breeding, snake harboring, fenced in area that is NOT accessible to citizens.
Any attempt to stop either of these should not be made under a false argument of 'it would increase the price of lots'. That price increase would be up to the developer. The developer would be the one to pay for the sidewalks. If sidewalks increase the value of the property, that is not necessarily a bad thing. The Town should not have to use taxpayer money to come back into an area years later to put in sidewalks because citizens are upset. The cost should be carried by the developers or the ones benefiting from the sidewalks NOT by all citizens.