CORRECTION:
It's never pleasant to admit to one's mistakes. But public mistakes require a public apology.
USC was incorrect in interpretating the code amendments in a previous blog. I apologize for the mistake and the assumption of any unprofessionalism by city staff.
It is also a good time to clarify that I respect all our public servants and understand that they have difficult jobs that are not made easier having to deal with conflicting messages from many sources. My criticism is directed at certain ideas and philosophies of land use and planning that are currently in vogue.
It's common these days to hear of people who wake up one day to find that something is going on in their town that makes it feel like a foreign place. If they had only known that their city government had changed direction, they would have done something. But the plans that created the transformation were in the works years before, and it would have taken dozens of people working full time to keep up with all that was going on. People have to trust that their local government is working on their behalf, not in pursuit of an ideological belief or outside influences.
The city is at a crossroads. Should we go forward in a low-growth, slow-growth mode, or plan for a high-density, vibrant and connected urban future?
This fight isn't personal and it isn't about any single person. So again, my apologies when I get things wrong. If I do offend, I hope it is because you don't agree with me. Leave me a comment so we can discuss it, and allow me to change my mind, or vise versa.
No comments:
Post a Comment