By Pauline Masson –
Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Linda Bruns welcomed a whirlwind of opinions on the tug of war between a subdivision swamped with traffic and a developer wanting to finish his planned industrial park.
And from this seasoned reporter’s view, this is how government is supposed to work.
Chairman Bruns went out of her way April 11 to assure that each speaker knew they were being heard and their concerns were taken seriouly. Approximately 20 people were in the audience, not a huge crowd but a step up from the empty council chamber that officials have faced since the COVID pandemic sent residents home.
In my thirty years reporting on Pacific government, this was far and away the most thorough discussion of a nagging problem in need of a solution that I have witnessed.
What was on the agenda was a request for P&Z to approve the preliminary plan for Pacific Logistics Park, a 10-lot industrial park to be constructed on the recently rezoned 48-acre Barbara Alt property located on Industrial Drive.
Steve Myers, city zoning officer, started the conversation by recommending approval of the preliminary plan.
Then one after the other, ten stakeholders in the development, including the developer, engineers, an attorney, neigboring property owners and one alderman-elect, stood at the speaker podium to talk about the future of the neighborhood.
To temper my praise of Chairman Bruns performance, it has to be noted that she had a good group of speakers to work with. Every speaker knew his or her stuff and took their time explaining their concerns. But Chairman Bruns was the star of the show, stressing that every point of view was important to the challenge at hand.
When a speaker or a member of her commission questioned what a previous speaker had said, she called speakers back to the podium to answer questions.
The simple item before the commission was whether to approve the preliminary plan for the new industrial park. But the bigger issue was what impact a new industrial park that hopes to bring ten new businesses to the area would have on the neighborhood.
The worries centered on current traffic, the additional traffic that ten new businesses will surely bring, and storm water problems in an adjoining subdivisions that would be impacted by the excavation for the new indstrial park.
These are recurring issues in Pacific, which is built on a slope, crisscrossed by several creeks, is eager for new businesses and new subdivisions, and has a history of properties that wait years for a developer to take an interest.
What Linda Bruns did at this meeting, was to take the quarreling out of the discussion. Every single speaker was encouraged to make his or her point, which was speckled with questions from a commissioner, that the chair took time to seek answers.
What makes this so reassuring to a critial observer of city government is that the issue before P&Z had multiple sides and several groups with something at stake. It’s complicated, as Commissioner Jerry Eversmeyer argued.
Instead of the folded arms and closed ears of officials on the podium that speakers have requently faced at city hall, this was a back and forth discussion with a serious attempt to get to the bottom of the challenge. Chairman Bruns made no motions to hurry speakers. She asked for specific locations, dates and times, who owned what and who was responsible for maintenance. She frequently asked the city administrator for clarification.
When one commissioner wanted to know the difference between detention and retention basins in storm water plans, she called Cocharn Engineering back to podium to answer.
When traffic counts were questioned, she encouraged resident Tom Love to interrupt the dicussion to explain a one week, 24 hours traffic study he completed last October that recorded 6,080 vehicles on Candlewick in a single week. She said she’d like to have a copy of the study results.
This could have been a lesson for outgoing alderman Jerry Eversmeyer, who banned citizen participation in his operations committee meetings. He was one of the best arguers in this exchange of information, reminding everyone that the city had accepted federal funds to improve Candlewick, after getting it reclassified as a feeder road. He worried that if it were closed off and the feeder road classification lost, the city might have to return the money.
This is the kind of discussion he could have heard in his committee meetings as citizens explained in detail how proposed legislation could affact them – before members came to a conclusion of what the city ouught to do.
It is impossible to say what the city ought to do on Candlewick. Or, what the city can afford to do.
The needs are many. The city needs industrial development to increase the tax base and bring jobs, which will eventually bring additional homes. The developer needs to complete his project so he can prepare lots for new businesses. The existing industrial firms need their employees to have a route to get to work. The Candlewick homeowners need less traffic on their street. The Westlake homeowenrs need protection from stormwater run off.
Any fix is going to cost the taxpayers money. And, P&Z doesn’t even get to determine what the fix might be. But what the April 11 meeting did for us as a community was to show that we can have a public discussion about a very troubling issue that gives a clearer understanding of what we face.
First term alderman James Cleeve and alderman-elect Anna Meadows were present for this line-up of eclectic concerns on the feared impact of the new development. They will have a role determining where to go from here.
In the end though, Chairman Bruns, with her adroit handling of this issue, gave aldermen a more thorough understanding of the issues they will be asked to navigate as they work through the plan approval process for the new industrial park.
Thumbs for a job well done.
I’m not sure why Steve Myers hasn’t spoken up. Because when he was Mayor he had a group of 3or4 homeowners of Candlewick at every meeting complaining about the problems there and wanting something done. I think they brought up every option you can think of and it was shot down one way or the other. The all Emergency Departments was against gating Candlewick. I was told it could even cause a lawsuit if was gated and delayed help getting to someone in need. So like they said in the meeting a new road is probably the best option. But that’s a major expense. I agree with you Pauline it was a great meeting and Chairman Bruns did her job great. I’m sure Alderman Cleeve is happy people got to speak as they should.
The ‘silence’ is most likely because one of the easier options for a road extension is along Myers Farm Ln. to Capper, now look who would have to deal with lots of extra car traffic.