Posts
It was 55-19.
Southern Cal made it very clear who was No. 1! (And most of the team is returning next year.) Check out this link to verify that. http://dougpace.blogspot.com/2005/01/one-and-only.html
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
USC - National Champions !
It was 55-19.
Southern Cal made it very clear who was No. 1! (And most of the team is returning next year.) Check out this link to verify that. http://dougpace.blogspot.com/2005/01/one-and-only.html
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Thoughts on Proposed 3-Acre Zoning in Ludlow
The following is an email sent to Frank Heald, Ludlow Town Manager, with respect to the new zoning amendment proposed by the Planning Commission and presented to the Ludlow Select Board on Monday, January 3, 2005:
"Frank: I detected a sense of concern by several sb [select board] members last night over the proposed 3 acre zoning as it may impact multi-acre property owners and, presumably, their future sub-division intentions.
I would like to make a suggestion to them (and would appreciate it if you would share this with them).
The SB has the power to make "technical" (small) changes to the proposal that does not impact the substance of the proposed zoning regulations - without resubmitting the proposal to the PC.
Revise the section of the proposal that cites the 3 acre regulation with the stipulation that section does not take effect until 180 days (c. 6 mos.) following the effective date of the zoning amendment. Consult with the town attorney to verify that the change is "small" - i.e., doesn't alter the substance of the 3 acre zoning change for R1.
If the six month hiatus is not enough, the sb can make it nine mos. or a year.
Such a change would give involved land-owners a reasonable opportunity to sub-divide under 1 acre regulations.
If it takes property owners longer than the delay period to sub-divide, I believe the town then has to decide which is more important to the interests of Ludlow as an entity, enactment of zoning to support the town plan and the long-range character of the town or the speculative gains of the involved property owners.
In general, the intent and objective of the new regulations is to preserve the rural character of Ludlow. The proposed acreage regulation for R1 is a step in that direction. I hope that the members of the sb will recognize this and openly support this zoning amendment. In my judgment, it is not enough for the sb to say that the zoning amendment should be decided by the town voters; members of the sb owe the town a public statement as to where that body stands with respect to passage of the zoning amendment.
The failure of the SB to openly support this zoning amendment invites the same fate all previous zoning amendments prepared by the Planning Commission have met since 1991.
Ralph Pace"
"Frank: I detected a sense of concern by several sb [select board] members last night over the proposed 3 acre zoning as it may impact multi-acre property owners and, presumably, their future sub-division intentions.
I would like to make a suggestion to them (and would appreciate it if you would share this with them).
The SB has the power to make "technical" (small) changes to the proposal that does not impact the substance of the proposed zoning regulations - without resubmitting the proposal to the PC.
Revise the section of the proposal that cites the 3 acre regulation with the stipulation that section does not take effect until 180 days (c. 6 mos.) following the effective date of the zoning amendment. Consult with the town attorney to verify that the change is "small" - i.e., doesn't alter the substance of the 3 acre zoning change for R1.
If the six month hiatus is not enough, the sb can make it nine mos. or a year.
Such a change would give involved land-owners a reasonable opportunity to sub-divide under 1 acre regulations.
If it takes property owners longer than the delay period to sub-divide, I believe the town then has to decide which is more important to the interests of Ludlow as an entity, enactment of zoning to support the town plan and the long-range character of the town or the speculative gains of the involved property owners.
In general, the intent and objective of the new regulations is to preserve the rural character of Ludlow. The proposed acreage regulation for R1 is a step in that direction. I hope that the members of the sb will recognize this and openly support this zoning amendment. In my judgment, it is not enough for the sb to say that the zoning amendment should be decided by the town voters; members of the sb owe the town a public statement as to where that body stands with respect to passage of the zoning amendment.
The failure of the SB to openly support this zoning amendment invites the same fate all previous zoning amendments prepared by the Planning Commission have met since 1991.
Ralph Pace"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
